Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 2169 - AT - Income TaxUndisclosed investment - accrual of income - Held that:- In respect of amount related to VFS (India) Pvt. Ltd., the assessee has placed on record a certificate from VFS (India) Pvt. Ltd. that no amount was paid to the assessee after 1st April, 2004. However, Assessing Officer has not made enquiry from concerned VFS (India) Pvt. Ltd. and proceeded to make addition on assumption basis. In our considered view, the Assessing Officer ought to have verified from the concerned party about the veracity of the certificate which is enclosed at page 9 of paper book. Considering the signature made at the certificate enclosed one of the sundry creditor is Mr. George Thomas whose signature matches with the certificate on page 9 of the paper book. Under these facts, it can be inferred that the finding of the authorities is ill founded and cannot be sustained. As no contrary material has been placed by the Revenue and gathered any material by making enquiry in this respect, we hereby direct the Assessing Officer to delete the amount for VFS (India) Pvt. Ltd. In respect of Kuoni Travels (India) Pvt. Ltd., it cannot be inferred that no service was provided post 1st April, 2004. As it is clearly mentioned in the cancellation agreement that the service provider was rendering services till 14.10.2005 and the payments for the services rendered till 14.10.2005 was made on 1st April, 2004. The assessee has not placed any confirmation from the concerned parities clarifying the position. Under these facts, we are unable to accept the contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. The addition made in respect of M/s. Kuoni travels (India) Pvt. Ltd. is hereby sustained In respect of Prabhat Automation,Hon’ble Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2004-05 has held that the assessee had merely possessed the right thereof which is not equivalent to ownership right though the assessee is described as owner in this case, we find that the Assessing Officer had made no effort to find out whether the particular property was vacant, during year under consideration. Under these facts, we do not see any reason to sustain the finding of authorities below. Hence, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition made on account of presumed income received from M/s. Prabhat Automation - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|