9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ept the contention of assessee and delete the addition to the extent of ₹ 10 lakhs out of the total addition made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit. Assessee has shown agricultural income out of that Assessing Officer has disallowed 40% on account of expenditure incurred by the assessee - As all expenditure and labour input must be incurred by the person with whom assessee got the agricultural activity done. The Assessing Officer has not assigned any reason to disbelieve this aspect. There is no such standard disallowance provided in the Income Tax Act that whenever anybody claims agricultural income, then 40% would be disallowed out of them. Therefore, we do not find any justification for making addition of ₹ 1,20,000/-. This addition is deleted. Addition of expenses on vehicle under the head Depreciation and Petrol Expense - non business use of vehicles - HELD THAT:- Assessee has three motor cars and the same are in its business use. For personal use, assessee was using another car registered in personal name of the Karta of HUF and Two Wheeler registered in the name of his son. The copy of RC book of vehicles for the personal purpose are also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sums were introduced in the capital account of Proprietary concern M/s. Pavan Associates. 5. Brief facts of these two grounds are that during the scrutiny proceedings undertook by the Ld AO it was revealed that a sum of ₹ 19 Lacs was introduced as capital in its proprietary-concern Ms/ Pavan Associates by way of cash deposited. Thereafter, Ld AO requested the assessee to furnish source of cash deposit of ₹ 19 Lacs but upon non response by the assessee the Ld AO has issued a show cause letter to the Assessee on 01/02/2013, requesting to show cause as to why the said cash deposit of ₹ 19 Lacs should not be added to your total income treating the same as your undisclosed income. In response the assessee replied and explained the source of cash in capital account as under:- (i) Withdrawal from his capital account with Pavan Associates of ₹ 10,64,100/- (₹ 7 lacs on 08/02/2008) and withdrawal of ₹ 3 lacs on11/02/2008 which was credited into his HUF personal account. (ii) Withdrawal of ₹ 3 lacs from SB alc. no. 17072 standing in the name of Sabebsingh B. Sengar Individual. (iii) ₹ 3 lacs agricultural income for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng evidence to explain the source of cash and thereby failed to prove the genuineness of the cash deposited in capital account. 5.7. The Ld AO has placed his reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. United Comm. And Industrial Co. Pvt. Ltd. Reported in 187 ITR 596 (Cal.), whereby, the Hon ble Calcutta High Court has held that the primary onus lies on the assessee to prove the nature and source of credits in its account. 5.8. Hence, the ld AO has made an addition of ₹ 17.20 lakhs in respect of the first 2 grounds of this appeal. 6. Aggrieved by the assessment order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) Ahmedabad and the same was dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). And therefore this appeal filed by the assessee. 7. The ld. AR for the assessee has explained first 2 ground of the assessee s case by taking me through the facts of the case by showing the submissions by way of paper-book at page No.33 of the paper-book having withdrawals of ₹ 16,78,693/- for AY 2007-08. Entries were also shown as Cash receipt of ₹ 7 lakhs and ₹ 3 lakhs in February-2008 from the Proprietor HUF of M/s.Pawan Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rgument can be applicable in the same manner on behalf of the assessee that cash must have been kept in safe custody for any contingency and then it was deposited after a gap of 14 months. Therefore, to my mind, there is nothing in the possession of the Revenue to disbelieve this claim of the assessee. I accept the contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee and delete the addition to the extent of ₹ 10 lakhs out of the total addition made by the AO on account of unexplained cash credit. 9.1. In other words, an addition of ₹ 10 lakhs is deleted from the total addition of ₹ 17,20,000/-. Thus, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 9.2. The next aspect is that the assessee has shown agricultural income of ₹ 3 lakhs out of that Assessing Officer has disallowed 40% on account of expenditure incurred by the assessee. 10. I have perused the records carefully. On perusal of the assessment order would reveal that the ld.AO did not dispute landholding owned by the assessee. He has not made any discussion on that point. He has also not disputed the earning of agricultural income. The Assessing Officer was of the view that for earning this income of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
