9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 751X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t dates or the source of such expenditure was from the third source which was unexplained. We note that once the revenue has treated the entire amount of expenditure as unexplained expense under section 69C of the Act, there cannot be any addition separately being part and parcel of the total addition otherwise it would lead to the double addition which is not warranted under the provisions of law until and unless the provisions of law requires so - we set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law and after necessary verification of the cash book. Ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes. - ITA No. 1359/AHD/2015 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2021 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President And Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Mehul K. Patel, A.R For the Revenue : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R ORDER PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Ahmedabad, dated 05/02/2015 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his levani . ₹ 1,250/- Parchuran kharch 4.1 As per the learned PCIT, such document, containing the details of unrecorded cash expenditure, for ₹ 60,10,250/- was not verified by the AO during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the assessment framed by the AO vide order dated 30th November 2010 was set aside by the learned Principal CIT under section 263 of the Act with the direction for making the fresh assessment. 4.2 Consequently, the AO initiated the proceedings by issuing notice under section 143(2) of the Act and sought an explanation about the unrecorded cash expenditure as discussed above. In reply thereto, the assessee contended that the impugned expenditures were incurred for the acquisition of the land and land levelling, tree cutting, and other connected expenditures which are detailed as below: A For obtaining the possession of Survey/Block No.146/B Village Rajoda ₹ 28,06,000/- B Payment made for land leveling tree cutting ₹ 29,50,000/- C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the learned CIT (A) who confirmed the order of the AO by observing as under: 2.1 I have carefully considered the contention as well as the case laws relied upon the appellant. I am not inclined TO agree with the view of appellant as it lac factual matrix. The appellant has contended that the expenses amounting to ₹ 60.10 lacs was incurred for meeting expenditure relating to obtaining the possession of block No.146/B, payment made to labourer for tree cutting and levelling etc. was yet to be recorded in its books. The appellant has produced a voucher and a banakhat agreement before A.O, as evidence, for payment of ₹ 28,06,000/- to one Mr. Parveen Singh for obtaining possession of the land at 146/B. As per the voucher, Shri Parveen Singh was paid ₹ 18,06,000/- on 04.11.2007 by the appellant The alleged banakhat was executed on 03.11.2007 in which it is mentioned that Shri Parveenbhai had received ₹ 10 lacs in cash from the assessee. The appellant's contention is unacceptable that the expenses and payment made in month of November, 2007, is the reason of shortage of cash. The cash book was found to be recorded till 11.02.2008. It is beyond any logic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. The appeal on this ground is dismissed 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The learned AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 163 and cash book for the year under consideration and contended that the impugned expenditures of ₹ 60,10,250/- were incurred by the assessee out of its accounted cash receipts. Therefore, there cannot be any addition to the total income of the assessee. 7.1 The learned AR likewise further submitted that the addition of ₹ 28,06,000/- has been made 2 times by the authorities below. Firstly, the entire amount of expenditure noted on loose paper bearing page number 04 was treated as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act and secondly the land acquisition cost of ₹ 28,06,000/- was treated as unaccounted cash payment under section 69C of the Act. The act of the authorities below has led to double additions of ₹ 28,06,000/- which is unwarranted under the provisions of law. 8. On the other and, the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and peru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s incurred out cash balance of the regular cash book of the assessee. If that be so, there cannot be any addition to the total income of the assessee merely on the reasoning that the assessee failed to record the expenditure in the books of accounts on the date of incurrence of the expenses which were actually recorded in the books of accounts on a later date. It is a matter of verification. In other words, it has to be seen whether there was the cash available in the books of accounts of the assessee as on the date on which the impugned expenditures were incurred i.e. November 2007. If there was sufficient cash in the books of the firm of the assessee, there is no possibility of treating the impugned expenditure as unexplained expense as provided under section 69C of the Act until and unless the revenue brings on record based on cogent materials that there was no cash available in the books of the assessee on the relevant dates or the source of such expenditure was from the third source which was unexplained. 9.4 Likewise, we note that once the revenue has treated the entire amount of expenditure of ₹ 60,10,250/- as unexplained expense under section 69C of the Act, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
