9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st the income embedded in the said amount of ₹ 15,81,100/- may be taxed. It has been brought to my notice that the AO has accepted the NP @ 0.85% of the assessee s business, therefore, for the interest of both the parties, I direct the AO to restrict the addition to 1% of ₹ 15,81,100/- and balance amount to be deleted. This ground of appeal of assessee is partly allowed. Addition being interest paid to contractees - ascertainment of liability - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case assessee follows mercantile system of accounting wherein the assessee was ascertained his liability of expenses as per terms of agreement and that the said ascertained liability of the assessee should be allowed as expenditure. As per the nature of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sters were impounded which are marked as SNK-01 to SNK-24. According to the AO, from a perusal of SNK-11 it revealed that it was self withdrawal and deposit registers and that cash deposit of ₹ 1,66,23,145/- have been made in the bank on various dates. However, according to the AO, from the cash book as submitted by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings it has been found that in the cash book the assessee company has not disclosed cash deposit of ₹ 15,81,100/- and thereafter he prepared a chart which shows that an amount ranging from ₹ 1000 to ₹ 4,50,000/- was deposited on various dates total amounting to ₹ 15,81,100/- which has not been allegedly entered in the cash book of the assessee. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee. According to the Ld. AR, from the chart drawn by the AO it can be seen that the sum of ₹ 15,81,100/- consists of a paltry amount of ₹ 1000/-, ₹ 5,000/-, ₹ 7,000/-, 14,000/-, ₹ 20,000/- etc. leaving aside the amount of ₹ 4,50,000/- which was deposited once only on 31.03.2012. According to the Ld. AR, when the assessee has withdrawn an amount of ₹ 3,12,65,403/- and had deposited cash of ₹ 1,66,28,453/- this amount should not have been separately taxed as the unexplained credit of the assessee u/s. 68 of the Act. According to Ld. AR, the entire amount has been deposited in the bank account of the assessee, so the bank statement was filed before the AO and so it cannot be said that it was undi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) was not justified in confirming the said addition. 6. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee brought to my notice that this issue is no longer res integra because in assessee s own case for AY 2013-14 in ITA No. 47/Ran/2020 this Tribunal vide order dated 30.04.2021 has decided this issue in favour of the assessee by holding as under: 2. The impugned issue raised by the assessee in this appeal relating to the confirmation of addition of ₹ 3,50,942/- which was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of claim of provision of interest expenditure payable to contractees. The Assessing Officer disallowed the aforesaid claim of provision of expenditure stating that the same is contingent liability. He, theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unting wherein the assessee was ascertained his liability of expenses as per terms of agreement and that the said ascertained liability of the assessee should be allowed as expenditure. As per the nature of the business of the assessee, the assessee has ascertained liability on interest expenditure and the Assessing Officer has not pointed out that the same was not ascertained, therefore, I do not find any justification on the part of the CIT(A) in confirming the impugned disallowance of interest expenditure. The same is ordered to be deleted. 5. The assessee vide ground no.2 has agitated its interest liability u/s 234A/234B which is consequential in nature and does not require any adjudication. 7. Since the Ld. DR could not point ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
