9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2791X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,66,753/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of unexplained capital. 2. Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 65,274/- made by the AO on account of difference in loan account as per bank statement and as per Balance Sheet. 3. Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 22,83,288/- made by the AO out of payment of wages. 4.Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,70,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of unexplain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lf has accepted that the assessee has explained the details of the source of capital introduced, no addition in this case is warranted. In fact, Revenue's grievance in filing the appeal, while the Assessing Officer himself is accepted the veracity, is not justified. Hence, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A). Apropos Ground No.2 : Deletion of addition of Rs. 65,274/- on account of difference in loan account as per bank statement and balance-sheet. 6. On this addition also learned CIT(A) obtained remand report from the Assessing Officer. In the remand report, the Assessing Officer stated that "it appears that the same addition has been made through oversight by the Assessing Officer. The explanation submitted by the appellant appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat without rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer could not make ad-hoc disallowance from the wage payment. Hence, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition. 9. Against the above order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has not maintained proper record and vouchers for the wages paid; hence, he submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly made the disallowance. Per contra, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the assessee has maintained proper vouchers. He submitted that in the line of assessee's business proper printed vouchers cannot be expected in all the cases. The learned Counsel submitted that assessee's profi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid, except a minor disallowance of Rs. 70,000/-. Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion, the ad-hoc disallowance is not sustainable. However, when confronted in this regard that there has been a marginal increase in the percentage of wages to the gross receipt and the fact that wages are not 100% verifiable, the learned Counsel of the assessee agreed for a small disallowance. We also find that one of the pleas in support of the deletion of the addition taken by the learned Counsel of the assessee relied upon the learned CIT(A) is the fact that in the subsequent assessment year the payment of wags was accepted by the Assessing Officer, except for the minor disallowance of Rs. 70,000/-. In these facts, in our considered opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration. As regards fresh loan of Rs. 2,00,000/- taken during the year from Mr. G.R. Nishad, it is seen that the appellant has placed on record, copy of income tax return, capital position, bank statement and confirmation of account. The AO in the Remand Report stated as under: "On verification of the copies of the accounts of Shri G.r. Nishad, it is found that he is a person of little means having yearly income of about Rs. 1 lacs; that the bank accounts of Shri G.R. Nishad with Punjab National Bank reflects that Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited on 29.08.2006 and the same was given to S.P. & Associates on 21.09.2006" 29. The A.O. has merely stated that the lender is not a person of means, however, the A.O. has not pointed out any fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r incomes cannot make any savings whatsoever. Doubts raised by the Assessing Officer regarding the bank statement with regard to the deposit can be subject matter of verification in the hands of the lender and not the assessee. This is more so when the lender is filing the income-tax return. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, there is no infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A); accordingly, we uphold the same. 16. In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed. Cross-Objection - By assessee 17. The Cross-objection filed by the assessee is in support of the order of the learned CIT(A). Since we have already dealt with the order of the CIT(A) in the Revenue's appeal above, no separate adjudication i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
