9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... double assessment, than estimating GP @ 20% only. HELD THAT:- Neither there is any rebuttal from the department side that the AO had made double addition of the impugned alleged undisclosed receipts nor could it deny the involvement of the corresponding expenditure incurred at the assessee s behest regarding the contractual services provided to the payee concerned. Faced with this situation, we are of the considered view that the AO could not have simply brushed aside the assessee s claim of corresponding expenditure which has been duly considered in the lower appellate discussion. We further wish to highlight the fact that even the Revenue s grounds are fair enough in not disputing correctness of the said expenditure items in it s instant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer s action adding the entire alleged undisclosed receipts of Rs. 98,94,960/- to the extent of 50% on the ground of double addition, coming to Rs. 49,47,480/- followed by GP estimation @ 20% thereupon, resulting in re-computation thereof to Rs. 9,89,496/-only as under: 10. Ground No. 2 is owing to whether the AO considered 26AS receipts twice and ascertained the gross receipts based on the same is correct or not. It is observed from the impugned assessment order that the case on hand was re-opened after verification of 26AS details from ITS (Individual Transaction Statement) details that the appellant was recipient of contractual receipts to the tune of Rs. 98,94,960/-. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 148 proceedings which is entirely wrong as the assessment was completed u/s 144 rws 147 of the Act due to non compliance on the part of the appellant. On contrary, it is seen from the impugned assessment order that O had stated that the appellant received contractual receipts to the tune of Rs. 98,94,960/- after verification of 26AS details from ITS though the AO had neither provided any details/ bifurcation therefore, nor discuss at length. In view of the above, it is amply evident that the AO considered the contractual receipts twice, i.e., (Rs. 98,94,960/- Rs. 49,47,480/- x 2). In short, it is evident that the appellant had received contractual receipts of Rs. 49,47,480/- instead of Rs. 98,94,960/- which is duly reflected in Form No. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO has, thus, fallen into error by adopting contractual receipts to the tune of Rs. 98,94,960/- as assessable income u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act instead of considering the same to the tune of Rs. 49,47,480/-. The action of the AO is. therefore, disapproved of and the AO is, directed to re-compute the addition made by adopting 20% of undisclosed receipts of Rs. 49,47,480/- instead of Rs. 98,94,960/-, Thus, the addition is restricted to Rs. 9,89,496/- [20% of Rs. 49,47,480/-] instead of earlier addition of Rs. 98,94,960/-. 11. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is Partly Allowed. This leaves the Revenue aggrieved. 4. Learned DR vehemently reiterated the assessment findings dated 26.11.2019 before us that the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
