9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... infirmity in the impugned order, therefore, we uphold the same. Accordingly, this issue raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition on account of tanker - HELD THAT:- The value of asset was found missing, subsequently the details in this regard was called for from the assessee. But the assessee never complied to such notices nor file any details during entire assessment proceeding and ultimately the AO had no other option but to estimated at Rs. 1,50,000/- value of tanker for relevant assessment year and added back to the total income of the assessee. Before the CIT(A) also, the assessee did not produce any supported documents to prove the fact contrary and the CIT(a) upheld the order passed by the AO. Even before this Tribunal also, the assessee did not appear and submit any additional evidence or document to prove the fact that the addition was not sustainable - We do not find any infirmity in the findings of ld. CIT(A) and accordingly confirmed the findings made by CIT(A). Accordingly, this issue raised by the assessee is also dismissed. Addition of VAT liability - HELD THAT:- AO on perusal of audited account, it was noticed by the AO that VAT was shown as payable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd submit any evidence or documents to prove the fact contrary, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the action of ld. CIT(A) while confirming the addition made by the AO. Accordingly, this issue raised by the assessee is dismissed. Disallowance being 30% of expenses claim under the head fuel and repairs, addition on account of bonus and addition on account of sales promotion, travelling conveyance, under the head staff welfare, Misc. and general expenses and addition on account of office expenses and printing and stationery are without any basis made by the lower authorities - HELD THAT:- AO had found that assessee had incurred expenditure under various heads however no proper bills and vouchers for having incurred such expenses, assessee could not produce before the AO and even before the ld. CIT(A) assessee could not able to produce any supported bills, vouchers for such expenses and the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the AO in this regard to the above issues. We, after, perusing the record and going through the material available on record and examining the order passed by the authorities below. We also do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders passe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... promotion. 10) For that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition of Rs.2,28,622 under the head travelling conveyance. 11) For that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition of Rs.1,48,884 under the head staff welfare. 12) For that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition of Rs.1,09,017 being 20% of the expenses claimed of Rs. 5,45,085 under the head Misc. general expenses. 13) For that the CIT(A) erred in sustaining an addition of Rs.1,04,442 being 15% of expenses claimed of Rs. 6,96,283 under the head office expenses and printing stationery. 14) For that any other ground at the time of hearing of the appeal. 5. When the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee. On perusal of records, it shows that number of opportunities have been given to the assessee but there is no compliance. It seems that assessee is not interested to pursue the appeal and, therefore, we decide to adjudicate the appeal with the able assistance of Ld. Sr. DR and material available on records. Ld. Sr. DR vehemently argued supporting the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard Ld. Sr. DR and perused the record placed before us. Brie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore this Tribunal. 8. While going through the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before this Tribunal there are almost 14 grounds raised by the assessee. The ground no. 1 raised by the assessee is general in nature, therefore, need not to be adjudicated. 9. Ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stating that Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made Rs.5,00,000/- by the AO on account of unexplained cash introduced as capital. While deciding this issue, the Ld. AO while framing the assessment observed as under: On going through the balance sheet of the assessee, it transpired that she has introduced capital of Rs.5.00 lakhs during the year in her business. She vide questionnaire dated 11.07.2014 was asked to file the evidences of genuineness of capital introduced. But she never complied the queries which has been discussed at length in above para. She however inspite of several non compliance was specifically asked to file her submission on or before 19.01.2014 in respect of points that you have introduced a fresh capital of Rs.5.00 lakhs. An evidence of genuineness in this regard has been called for from you. No evidences has been filed so far. Therefore why t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition of Rs. 5 lakh as unexplained capital, in respect of this issue, the AO had put questionnaire dated 11.07.2014 and was asked to file the assessee regarding genuineness of capital introduced. But, the assessee had not complied in response to notice issued by the AO, no documentary evidences regarding genuineness of such introduction of capital before AO. Therefore, the AO had no other option but Rs. 5,00,000/- introduced capital was treated as unexplained capital investment u/s 69 of the Act and added back to her total income. Subsequently, at the time of hearing before the ld. CIT(A) also the assessee contended that a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- was withdrawn from assessee s capital towards intended expenses on 15.04.2011 and part of such withdrawal amounting to Rs. 5,00,000/- was re-deposited to the capital account. However, assessee s submission was not admitted by ld. CIT(A) as because it would be shortfall of Rs. 3,00,000/- in assessee s capital account even after crediting the net profit for the assessment year in question and the ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the ld. AO, even before us appellant also did not appear and cannot proved any contrary findings of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of RS.1.50 lakhs towards unexplained investment into tanker/lorry used for the purposes of the transportation business of appellant for tax which being very reasonable, is, being upheld and this ground of appeal is, therefore, dismissed. 10.2. We have heard at length the Ld. Sr. DR and note that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a speaking order in respect of addition of Rs. 1,50,000 on account of tanker, while ld. AO deciding the instant issue, the AO noticed that an income of transportation has been credited. However, the value of asset was found missing, subsequently the details in this regard was called for from the assessee. But the assessee never complied to such notices nor file any details during entire assessment proceeding and ultimately the AO had no other option but to estimated at Rs. 1,50,000/- value of tanker for relevant assessment year and added back to the total income of the assessee. Before the ld. CIT(A) also, the assessee did not produce any supported documents to prove the fact contrary and the ld. CIT(a) upheld the order passed by the AO. Even before this Tribunal also, the assessee did not appear and submit any additional evidence or document to prove the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd note that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a speaking order in respect of addition of Rs. 52,685 on account of VAT liability while we are going through the findings and material available on record in respect of sustaining the addition of Rs. 52,685/- on account of VAT liability, the AO on perusal of audited account, it was noticed by the AO that VAT amounting to Rs. 52,685/- was shown as payable. However, the AO was asked the assessee to submit the copy of challan to support the actual payment of VAT was discharged and accordingly the AO had added back the amount of Rs. 52,685/- to the total income of the assessee and the assessee while raising this issue before the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee completely failed to show that payment of VAT was discharged and the ld. CIT(A) accordingly confirmed the action taken by the AO in respect of addition of Rs. 52,685/- made by the AO. While we going through the findings of both the lower authority perusing the orders passed by the authorities below. We do not find any contrary view in respect of the order passed by the authorities below and while deciding this issue and we confirmed the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) in respect of deciding this is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... count was offered leading AO to invoke the provisions of section 69 of the Act and bringing the amount to tax in the hands of the appellant. In the course of the appellate proceedings of the case, once again, no explanation whatsoever was offered in this regard, accordingly, I have no option but to agree with the action of the AO in invoking the provisions of section 69 of the Act which is being upheld. 12.2. We have heard at length the Ld. Sr. DR and note that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a speaking order in respect of addition of Rs. 2,00,000/-on account of security deposit. While we considering the instant issue raised by the assessee, the AO sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- on account of security deposit. However, the AO found that the investment made made as security with LOC never appeared in balance sheet of assessee, further the assessee did not comply and filed any submission to prove the fact contrary to the findings of AO, accordingly the AO treated the deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/- as unexplained income of the assessee u/s 69 of the Act and added to the income of the assessee and even before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not able to show any submission and doc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing observations: In the course of the assessment proceedings of the case, it has been found out by the AO that on comparison of purchases and sales of the appellant, there was difference of Rs.2,45,290/-. No explanation whatsoever in respect of the same was offered at the time of assessment proceeding the case, neither any explanation was put forth at the time of the appellate proceeding of the case. Since, the said difference was found to be not more than purchases made by the appellant on a daily basis, it was concluded by the AO that not only the appellant had made unexplained investment in the purchases to this amount but has also concealed profit on the sale of the same which was computed at the rate of 2.06%, as declared in the returns of income for the A. Y 2012-13. At the time of the appellate proceeding of the case, the appellant merely reiterated the submissions made at the time of assessment proceeding of the case. In absence of any verifiable evidence lest documentary evidence, I have no option but to confirm the action of AO on this score, and accordingly, this ground of appeal is, therefore, dismissed. 13.2. We have heard at length the Ld. Sr. DR and n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- only against the total sale of Rs.40.10 crores i.e. 0.08% . Hence the expenses claimed by the assessee appears very excessive, unreasonable and on a very higher side which is also strengthened from the enquiry report of the ITI who on physical verification did not get any supportive bills and vouchers of claimed expenses. The assessee has claimed expenses under the head fuel of Rs.6,18,240/- repair maintenance of Rs.4,98,250/- against the transportation come of Rs.11,44,847/- which has been credited to the profit loss a/c. The expenditure under the head of insurance might have also been claimed against transport vehicle. Thus the assessee has claimed the entire amount of income as expenses under these heads. It is important to mention here that when compared to other petrol pump of this area namely M/s Ram Niwas Ram Ballabh, Hajipur, it was found that the assessee has claimed expenses to the extent of 70% of its transportation income and balance amount has been credited as income. Whereas in the instant case the entire amount has been claimed as expenses. The assessee vide this office questionnaire dated 11.07.2014 was requested to file the bifurcated profit and loss a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no stock of any items which are given as gifts nor get any bills and vouchers of such expense. The staff goes to different cities and states to moblise the truck owners to get the fuel from her pump. But did not submit any evidences of the same. The claim as made by the assessee do not have any evidences like bills vouchers and copy of agreement if any made between the assessee or the truck owners. One important thing is to be mention here that the sale of the assessee has decreased in the year under consideration when compared to previous A.Y. i.e. 2011-12 by about Rs.4 crores. Further on perusal of the profit and loss a/c, it is gathered that the assessee has not shown a single Rs. as closing stock of items which she claimed of giving as gifts to increase her sale. Hence such claim is factually incorrect. Further the palm plate obtained by the ITI during the course of enquiry shows that there are fifteen items of gifts mentioned against the purchase of diesel starting from 150 lit. to 30000 lit. It is important to mention here that at a time one can buy diesel maximum of his fuel tank capacity which may be not more than 300 lit. and as per scheme here is gift of towel ( Ga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Further it also cannot be ascertained that entire expenditure is attributable to his business activities. Hence considering the above facts 30% of Rs.4,96,280/- i.e. Rs.1,48,884/- is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee treating it as excessive and unreasonable. The profit and loss a/c of the assessee further transpired that the assessee in addition of claiming exp. under all relevant heads, has claimed exp. under the heads like misc. exp gen exp. of Rs.2,88,615/- 2,56,470/- respectively. No bifurcated details of expo with any evidences could be filed by the assessee. No books ever produced by her. Hence the genuineness of expo remained unverified. Therefore, the nature of expenditure and the lack of proper supporting evidences, payments made against the expenses are not fully verifiable in the manner of quantum, authenticity and the purpose. Further it also can not be ascertained that entire expenditure is attributable to his business activities. Hence considering the above facts 20% of Rs.5,45,085/- i.e. Rs.1,09,017/- is disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee treating it as excessive and unreasonable. The assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid out for the purposes of the business as mandated under section 37(1) of the Act. But, the appellant could not offer any verifiable explanation in this regard, rather, it was found by the AO that there was no proper bills and vouchers for having incurred these expenditure. In this regard, it would be relevant to look into the provisions of section 37 (1 ) the act which is extracted as under:- General. 37. (1) Any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described in sections 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head Profits and gains of business or profession . Explanation 1.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purpose of business or profession and no deduction or allowance shall be-made in respect of such expenditure, Explanation 2.-For the removal of doubts, it is he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is found that appellant had claimed expenses under the head bonus amounting to Rs. 4,02,600/- . It has been contended by the appellant that staff at the petrol pumps had been paid bonus on 2 occasions during the year i.e. on Holi and Diwali. The payment of bonus had been claimed to be one month salary of the staff. However, on verification of the salary payment, it was found that the staff of the appellant was being paid salary of RS.2.93 lakhs per month whereas bonus of Rs.4,02,600/- had been made which was not commensurate with the one-month salary of the staff. Therefore, the excess payment made on the account of bonus of Rs.1,09,600/- was disallowed. No explanation whatsoever was offered in the course of the appellate proceedings of the case, accordingly, action of the AO in this regard is being exclusively based on the facts is, therefore, upheld. 14.2. While we are going to decide ground no. 7 to 13 together as raised by the assessee in this appeal are disallowance of Rs. 3,34,947/-under the fuel, repair transportation income, Rs. 1,09,600/- on account of bonus, Rs. 4,36,215/- on account of sales promotion, Rs. 2,28,622/- on account of travelling conveyance, Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
