9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (12) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se accounts during the accounting period under consideration, the CIT(A) has erred in not having deleted the additions of Rs. 4,30,024 and of Rs. 2,04,500, made by the ITO. It is prayed that the above additions may kindly be deleted and the remaining grounds of appeal taken before the CIT(A) as reproduced by him in his orders, may kindly be disposed of on merit." 2. The facts briefly stated are that the ITO found credits in the accounts of Shri Pradeep Gupta and Ved Paraksh aggregating to Rs. 6,34,524 as under: Rs. 43,0,024 Shri Pradeep Gupta Rs. 2,04,500 Shri Ved Prakash Assessment in this case was made by the ITO under s. 144 of the Act as the assessee failed to produce the books of account. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts of the two creditors right from the accounting year 1978-79 relevant to the asst. yr. 1979-80 to 1982-83 relevant to the asst. yr. 1983-84 have been filed in the paper book showing old balance being brought forward in these accounts from year to year, and these accounts have been substantiated by the documents filed with the returns of income for those assessment year including the balance-sheets, sundry debtors, etc. These have been verified by us from the assessment record which were produced by the ld. Departmental Representative during the course of hearing the ld. Departmental Representative could not controvert the fact that these documents were filed with the returns of income for earlier assessment years and balances in these a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lephone expenses Rs. 15,000 e. Out of expenses on electricity and wages, etc Rs. 7,000 The CIT(A) did not record his findings on these additions though these were also contested in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that these additions have no link with the settlement petition made by the assessee. While the CIT(A) has restored these additions also to the file of the ITO to be considered in the light of the order of the Settlement Commission. He, therefore, urged that the order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and these additions should be considered and deleted. Both the ld. Counsel for the assessee and the ld. Departmental Representative agreed that these additions have been considered by the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
