9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assessing Officer by filing an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). However, the appeal was ultimately withdrawn. Essentially, assessee accepted the additions / disallowances made by the AO. Neither before AO nor before Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee was able to furnish any reasonable explanation to demonstrate that there is no deliberate attempt to either conceal the income or furnish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . At the outset, we must observe, when the appeal was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee to represent the case despite service of notice. Even, there is no application seeking adjournment. On perusal of record, it is observed, on several occasions earlier when the appeal came up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The aforesaid facts clearly reveal that no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer noticed that the assessee had debited an amount of Rs. 4,03,63,883/- towards salary and wages and daily allowance of employees of sister concern Alchemist Limited. Being of the view that part of the expenditure is non genuine, the Assessing Officer disallowed 50% of such expenses and added back an amount of Rs. 2,01,81,941/-to the income of the assessee. Further, the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntative and perused the material on record. It is evident, before the Assessing Officer the assessee failed to produce clinching evidence to justify claim of various expenditure. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer disallowed a part of the expenditure claimed. It is observed, the assessee contested the additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by filing an appeal before learned Commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
