Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 45 - AT - Income TaxClaim of deduction u/s 35AD - CIT(A) allowed claim - Held that:- There cannot be any doubt with regard to assessee’s claim that the cold storage has started operating during the relevant FY, irrespective of the fact whether it is in February’10 or March’10. The department has failed to bring any material on record to either controvert the factual finding of ld. CIT(A) or any other contrary evidence to conclusively prove the fact that the cold storage has started operating in April’10. As far as the allegation of AO that some of the farmers have stated that cold storage started operating in April’10, we find merit in the submissions of ld. AR that in absence of confrontation of such statement to assessee and allowing opportunity to cross-examine the farmers, AO could not have used such adverse material for disallowing assessee’s claim of deduction u/s 35AD. Even otherwise also, in the face of substantive evidence brought on record in the form of electricity bill, bonds/receipts issued to farmers, etc. demonstrating that assessee has commenced operation of cold storage in the FY 2009-10, the statement of the farmers cannot be given much credence. In the aforesaid view of the matter, there being no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A) - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition u/s 69 - addition deleted by CIT(A) - Held that:- Addition u/s 69 of the Act has been made purely on conjectures and surmises. The department’s contention that bonds were not produced before AO by assessee, though, technically may be correct, but, at the same time, it is to be noted that bank authorities have submitted all informations relating to loan granted to farmers on the basis of the bonds/receipts given by assessee. Therefore, on the face of such evidence, it cannot be said that stocks kept in the cold storage are unexplained investment of assessee. Department having failed to bring any material on record to controvert the aforesaid facts, addition made has no legs to stand. Accordingly, ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition and, hence, upholding the order of ld. CIT(A), we dismiss the grounds raised by revenue.- Decided in favour of assessee.
|