Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1227 - HC - Income TaxSuppression of consultation fee - Held that:- The findings of the Tribunal with respect to the addition towards suppression of consultation fee for the assessment years 2002-03 to 2005-06 and 2008-09 cannot be sustained and the order of the assessing officer has to be restored and we do so. suppression of income from surgeries and sale of lenses - Held that:- In respect of the assessment years other than 2007-08 and 2008-09, we find that absence of any incriminating material unearthed on search is one of the reasons stated by the Tribunal. Though we do not approve this reasoning, we find that there is no other material at all to sustain the finding of the CIT(Appeals) or interfere with the finding of the Tribunal. Therefore, we confirm the findings of the Tribunal in so far as these issues are concerned. Disallowance of a portion of salary and expenses - Held that:- The addition was made by the assessing officer entirely on the basis of the sworn statement of the assessee, the inaccuracy of which was evident from the statement of the employees of the assessee recorded by the assessing officer himself. The Tribunal has, therefore, found that the facts contained in the statement ought to have been corroborated and that the assessing officer did not cross verify the statement with other employees. It was also found that the assessing officer has factually ignored the salary payments made to two cousin brothers of the assessee, whose services were availed of by him. On this basis, the Tribunal, after recognizing that the only option was to estimate a reasonable amount towards salary expenses, estimated ₹ 21,500/- as the monthly salary payment for the assessment year 2008- 09. On that basis, the Tribunal has estimated the salary payments for the years 2002-03 to 2008-09 and directed the assessing officer to work out the disallowance charges estimated by it. This finding again is completely a factual one and we see no reason to interfere with the same. Disallowance of a part of the expenditure claimed under the head 'consumables and medicines' - Held that:- We find that the assessing officer disallowed 80% of the amount claimed by the assessee which was confirmed by the CIT (Appeals). The Tribunal, however, modified the same and directed the assessing officer to restrict disallowance to 30% of the expenditure claimed. This again is a factual finding and there is no reason to upset the same. Addition on unexplained gifts under section 68 - Held that:- There was sufficient materials before the Tribunal to prove the identity of the donors who are close relatives of the assessee, the source and the creditworthiness of the donors. As far as the genuineness of the transactions is concerned, there was nothing on record to doubt the same. Therefore, the assessee had satisfied the dictum laid down by the Apex Court in C.P.Mohanakala (2007 (5) TMI 192 - SUPREME Court ). It was taking note of these facts that the Tribunal has set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and directed the assessing officer to delete the addition relating to the gifts
|