9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (12) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r came before the CIT (A) he restricted the disallowance to Rs. 1,500. It is this action of the CIT (A) which is disputed by the assessee before us. The ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. D. K. Gupta submitted that the factum of Ramesh Kumar working is neither disputed nor even in doubt, Ramesh Kumar is a graduate, as is stated at Bar, and salary of Rs. 6,600 for the year is not very heavy. The ld. Departmental Representative Mr. M. P. Singh, on the other hand submitted that even in earlier years salary was paid and some disallowance was made. However, every year is independent and during this year the dispute is raised by the assessee. As per submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, it is an uncontroverted fact that Ramesh Kumar is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and, if there are no spare parts in hand of the assessee is anybody's guess because the submissions of the assessee before the two lower authorities as also before us, is that only that expense is debited which is incurred. Even if this addition of Rs. 2,000 is sustained on the premises that it may be stock or spare parts in hand, it has to be taken into consideration in subsequent year and surely no purpose will be served because amount sought to be disallowed is petty. The petty disallowance, there are of Rs. 2,000 according to us, is not called for because no disallowance on this account has ever been made in the past. Repairs are undoubtedly heavier than in the last year but working is also admitted to be more by the ITO. Under the ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ginally the said amount had come on 31st Dec., 1976 in the bank in which Rs. 20,000 was deposited with the assessee on 12th Jan., 1977 It was received through cheques. Source of Rs. 20,000 was not explained before the ITO, as observed by the CIT (A). Thesefore, the ITO made the addition. The assessee's case was also that Kala Singh had 23 1/2 acres of land. The ITO rejected the said explanation and made the addition and so did the CIT (A). 5. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that Kala Singh belonged to agriculturist family and had 23 1/2 acres of land. He drew our attention to copies of accounts of Kala Singh with the assessee for the year under consideration and even subsequent years. He also placed before us copy of account o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the firm instead of giving the same in village." The above reply is to the question: "Whether the money was given by himself or demanded by M/s. Ram Chand Sohan Lal?" This single question and answer cannot be treated as damaging to the assessee's causes because the statement has got to be read as a whole. In the said statement, it is the admission of Bagga Singh that his father was having 23 1/2 acre of land. He had deposited the sum of Rs. 19,800 after withdrawing the same from the bank. It is also admitted therein unequivocally that the father's annual produce was the extent of Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 35,000 out of which 50% was utilised for agricultural expenses. It is also admitted that his father's last credit balance was transfe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
