9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es claimed under the heads consumables, power/fuel, packing, freight, miscellaneous, telephone, conveyance, travelling etc. as no vouchers were produced for expenditure claimed as Rs. 47 lacs. AO had given full opportunity to the assessee, who could submit evidence of expenditure of about Rs. 8 lakhs out of his claim of Rs. 54.92 lakhs. The Tribunal has further held that the disallowance was rightly restricted to 1/10th of the expenditure, which had not been substantiated by the assessee, which comes to about Rs. 4,70,000/-. After going through the impugned judgment, this Court is of the view that in this case, the Tribunal has rightly dismissed the appeal(s) of the assessee by appreciating the evidence in the right perspective. Appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are dealt under another concern under the proprietor name of Hindustan Sanitary Plaza. The appellant filed the computation and returns for the assessment year 2014-15. Thereafter, a demand notice dated 22.08.2016, under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a sum of Rs. 8,75,830/- was issued to the appellant. As per the information furnished by the appellant, a gross total of Rs. 10,48,419/- was made from Siddhi Bio-tech Industries and Rs. 1,41,547/- was made from the sanitary business. Vide order dated 22.08.2016 (Annexure A-1), the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 14,62,636/- in the income on the basis of discrepancy in the stock and that the closing stock was short by the said value. The entire value of the stock ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Tribunal has examined this aspect by observing that the Assessing Officer has made this addition on account of non-disclosure of closing stock of Rs. 14,62,636/- as it was not shown in column 4 of Part A, P L in the income tax return. Hence, the Assessing Officer has rightly observed that the excess of assets in the shape of closing stock was his profit, which was not declared as income by the assessee. Learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to produce any document to show that in column 4 of Part A, P L, the closing stock of Rs. 14,62,636/- was ever shown before the Assessing Officer. Moreover, the assessee s claim that he should get benefit of provision of deduction under Section 80JJA of the Act was also held to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
