9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owance is restricted to the 20% from the total disallowance. Disallowance of insurance expenses - AO disallowed 50% of insurance expenses - AR submitted that in the remand proceedings the AO noticed that it was paid through banking channel, therefore, the disallowance should not be made by the AO - HELD THAT:- Considering the rival submissions and perusing the material on record, in the remand proceedings, the AO fairly accepted that the insurance expenses were paid through banking channels, therefore, the payment should not be doubted . Both the authorities below have accepted that the payments have been for the payment of Insurance expenses , therefore, this issue is allowed. Disallowance of Workman and staff - welfare - HELD THAT:- We observe that in the remand proceedings, the AO accepted that these are the payments which has been deducted by the contractree from the running bills, therefore, the AO should not have been disallowed the payments expenses. The assessee has not incurred nay expenditures directliy. These deduction are mandatory deductions as per the terms and conditions of the contract, therefore this ground of appeal is allowed. Disallowance under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant Member For the Appellant : Shri Pranav Krishna, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R. [CIT] ORDER PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, AM : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Bangalore dated 29.3.2019 for the assessment year 2016-17. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:- 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax passed under Section 250 of the Act in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case. 2. The Appellant denies himself liable to be assessed over and above the total income ap returned by the appellant of Rs. 13,65,950/- on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income -tax [Appeals] erred in passing the appellate order without affording the appellant a reasonable opportunity of hearing which i in grave violation of principles of natural justice and consequently the appellant order requires to be cancelled on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned CIT[A] erred in confirming the addition made by the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case. 13. The appellant denies himself liable to be charged to interest under section 234A 234B and 234C of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 14. The appellant craves leave of this Hon ble Tribunal to add, alter, substitute and delete any or all of the grounds of appeal urged above. 15. For the above and other grounds to be urged during the hearing of the appeal the Appellant prays that the appeal be allowed in the interest of equity and justice. 2. The ground Nos. 1, 2, 3, 14 and 15 are general in nature, hence no adjudication is required. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 18/3/2017 declaring a total income of Rs.13,65,950/- and assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of civil contract. The assessee has shown his income under the head income from house property , income from business and profession long term capital gain and, income from other source . The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were issued to the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the various notices were sent to the assessee and email was also sent to the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of verification and also as per the arguments of the asseseee. If it is found that difference amount includes interest and carried forward from the previous year the AO shall delete the addition. The assessee shall produce necessary documents for substantiating his case. These grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No.5 12. The ground relates to the disallowance of 50% of the salary and wages amounting to Rs.22,54,413/- and the AR submitted that the CIT(A) is not justified to restrict this issue upto 50% and the CIT(A) has decided this issue in para 6.8 and he has partly confirmed the order of the AO by holding that the assessee could not substantiate the claim fully along with the documentary proof viz., name of the employees, Designation, No. Of working days, salary particulars as per para No. 6.8 of his order . 13. The ld.AR tried to distinguish the findings of the CIT(A) but at the last he fairly accepted that the disallowance can be restricted to 20% from the total disallowance of salary and wages . 14. The ld. Dr. vehemently objected that the assessee was unable to substantiate the payments with the supporting vouchers and other observation made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO should not have been disallowed the payments expenses. The assessee has not incurred nay expenditures directliy. These deduction are mandatory deductions as per the terms and conditions of the contract, therefore this ground of appeal is allowed. 23. In the result, Ground No.7 is allowed. 26. The assessee has raised ground No.8 in regard to the partial disallowance of Rs.10,34,24, 550/- under the head of other expenses as noted by the CIT(A) in his order at para No.6.12. During remand proceedings, the assessee has submitted complete evidences for disallowance of Rs.25,19,88,546/- vide letter dated 20.03.2019 during the course of remand proceedings, whereas the said facts were not brought out in the remand report. The AO had accepted to the tune of Rs.14,85,63,996/- and CIT(A) has also accepted the same. The CIT (A) observed that the assessee was unable to produce the complete evidence even during the appellate proceedings in support of his claim for the balance amount, the ld. AR of the assessee again requested and undertook that the assessee shall produce all bills and vouchers in support of his claim , therefore, the matter may be sent back to the AO for further verific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal, however, deleted such addition in the following manner :- 10. The order issue in A.Y 2000-01 is addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 10,09,000/= on account of unsecured loan. In this regard, we find that out of these loan of this amount, only Rs. 50,000/= was received in the present year and the balance is on account of opening balance. Hence, only this amount of Rs. 50,000/= can be considered for addition under Section 68 in this year. We, therefore, delete the balance addition. Now on account of the loan of Rs. 50,000/= received by the assessee in the present year, we feel that although the assessee could not properly explain the same but the assessee deserves the benefit of telescoping against the addition in the income made by the Assessing Officer, which is confirmed by us. As against a loss of Rs. 1,22,100/= declared by the assessee in the ROI, income assessed by the A.O is Rs. 36,506/= which means that total addition made by the A.O which is confirmed by us also is Rs. 1,58,606/= whereas the fresh loan is only Rs. 50,000/= only. Hence, this addition, of Rs 50 000/= is also deleted Ground No. 3 is allowed. Ground No. 1 was not pressed and hence, reject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
