Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1358 - AT - Income TaxAssessment of income - AY selection - Held that:- The assessee had raised invoices on account of licence fee and annual maintenance charges for the calendar year January, 2010 to December, 2010. Apparently, only 3 months fell in the impugned financial year i.e. A.Y. 2009-10 ending 31-3-2010. The invoice was raised for full 12 months period. Thus, the income that accrued to the assessee during the year before us pertained to ‘3 months’ period only. Thus, in our view, the assessee has rightly shown the income for ‘3 months’ period only. It is further noted that in any case, the balance amount has been included by the assessee in its income for the subsequent year i.e. A.Y. 2011-12 and has been accepted as such by the AO. Under these circumstances, we do not find that the approach of the revenue was justified in following such a hyper-technical approach. Also it is further brought to our notice that tax rates in both the years are reported to be same. Under these circumstances, we find no justification to sustain the addition made by the AO and, therefore, the same is directed to be deleted - Decided in favour of assessee Rejecting all expenses - not accepting the business income offered by the assessee company - Held that:- It is noted that complete details and documentary evidences have been filed before the lower authorities. This fact has not been controverted by the Ld. DR. There was no justification for not treating the income under the head ‘income from business’. Similarly, there is no justification for not allowing the expenses claimed by the assessee. Under these circumstances, we direct the AO to treat the income shown by the assessee under the head ‘Income from business’. With regard to the expenses, the issue is sent back to the file of the AO for allowing adequate opportunity to the assessee to file requisite details and evidences. The AO shall consider the entire material on objective basis and shall allow the expenses accordingly. No expenses should be disallowed without confronting the doubts to the assessee. This ground may be treated as allowed, for statistical purpose. Addition u/s 69A - unexplained income received from SSSMPL - Held that:- the undisputed facts on record are that the assessee did not receive any such amount from SSSMPL. The impugned amount might have been received by the director in the bank account of the director himself, but definitely not by the assessee company. These facts were not controverted by the Ld. DR during the course of hearing before us. Under these circumstances, the addition in the hands of the assessee was not permissible under the law. The addition has been made without verifying the facts and without referring to the provisions of law. In any case, if the AO had some doubts, then the requisite enquiries should have been made in the hands of the said director or in the hands of SSSMPL. Unless the amount is received by the assessee company, the assessee is not obliged under the law to disclose the same in its books of account. Thus, the impugned addition being purely illegal and to be deleted - Decided in favour of assessee.
|