Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 67 - ITAT AHMEDABADAddition made u/s 68 of the Act – Unexplained credits – Held that:- CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee by giving opportunity to the AO to rebut the submission of the assessee which he has failed to do and since all the depositors were holding PAN Nos. - CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition – Relying upon Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Verses Rohini Builders [2001 (3) TMI 9 - GUJARAT High Court ] the order passed by him is upheld – Decided against Revenue. Unexplained investment in fixed assets u/s 69 of the Act – Held that:- CIT(A) after taking into consideration the remand report of the AO and verifying all the invoices filed by assessee in support of purchase of fixed assets held that addition made to the fixed assets were genuine - addition u/s. 69 being 10% of total addition made in fixed assets was not sustainable as the same was made on presumption basis and without bringing any material on record – there was no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) as it has been passed after giving opportunity to the AO on the submissions – Decided against Revenue. Addition made on account of unexplained purchases – Held that:- CIT(A) held that since assessee has furnished all the invoices and ledger accounts during the remand proceedings which were duly examined by the AO and nothing adverse was found by him during this investigation - 10% addition on lump sum basis cannot be made and he deleted the addition – there is no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue. Addition made on account of administrative and other expenses – Held that:- CIT(A) held that the finding of AO as unreasonable and holding that disallowance made by AO being on higher side restricted the addition to Rs. 1,50,000 - CIT(A) has given relief after going through the nature of the expense which were mainly on account of interest/advertisement expenses, professional charges and audit fees – there is no reason to interfere with the order – Decided against Revenue. Addition made on account of preliminary expenses u/s 35 of the Act – Held that:- CIT(A) had rightly held that preliminary expenses being 1/5th of the total expenses were allowable u/s. 35D and therefore he deleted the addition so made by AO – Decided against Revenue.
|