Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (8) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... examination of records, the explanation has been found to be incorrect. Without giving any reason, the rejection of the explanation thereof is not sustainable. Hence, we direct that addition should be restricted to the difference as accepted by the assessee in its explanation - Appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed. - ITA No. 790/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2021 - Shamim Yahya , Member ( A ) And Pavan Kumar Gadale , Member ( J ) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri. T. S. Khalsa ORDER Per Shamim Yahya, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 12/09/2017 and pertains to Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has filed the following grounds of appeal:- Under the f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unt not consider in 26AS but we consider in P L (Total diff is ₹ 456733 - 143035 - 313698) 2. UEM India Pvt. Ltd. 17,48,846 11,20,846 6,28,000 1) ₹ 138537 amount of service tax consider as income in 26AS 2) 489463 sales amount not consider in but not in P L A/c. (total diff is ₹ 489463- -138537 = 628000] Total 18,45,521 3.1. However, the ld. AO held as under:- On perusal of the above chart it can be seen that at Sr. 1 of the above table the difference of income as per P L and 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Ld. AO has rightly brought to tax the total receipts. The action of the Ld. AO is therefore said to have been made on sound footing and after due verification and application of mind. Hence I do not find any inconsistency and the findings of the Ld. AO are therefore confirmed. This ground is dismissed. 3.3. Against the said order, assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record. None appeared on behalf of assessee despite notice. We note that assessee has duly explained to the ld. Assessing Officer that the reason of impugned difference was partly relating to service tax which has been accepted by the ld. Assessing Officer. However, the explanation of sales which has been considered differently .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates