Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1705 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 69B - unexplained investments and interest thereon - HELD THAT:- Peak determined by the A.O. is not correct, otherwise also, when once peak amount has been added then no separate addition is required. It seems that the A.O. has not properly prepared the list of debtors and creditors based on any logic. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition under the Provisions of Section 69B. This section relates to investment made by the assessee in the acquisition of bullion/jewellery or other valuable articles but it does not speak about any investment in debtors. Section 69B also stipulates the position where the investment exceeds the amount shown in the books of account. Since the assessee does not maintain any books of account wherein the debtors and creditors are reflected , therefore, this addition has also been wrongly made and upheld u/s 69B of the Act. Hence, in our considered opinion, only commission income has to be determined in this case and nothing more. Accordingly, we reverse the findings of the ld CIT(A) and order to delete the entire addition so made. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition u/s 68 - unexplained cash addition as assessee could not prove the source of advances received - HELD THAT:- Revenue’s claim that during the course of survey concerns giving advances were found to be non-existent. However, the assessee claims that the above concerns were having PAN and the new address could have been ascertained from Registrar of Companies. It is also noted that the ACB, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur has conducted the similar enquiries against the concerns at Mumbai and found the concerns were not existing on the given registered office addresses. The ld.AR of the assessee submitted that lower authorities have referred and relied on the enquiries conducted by the ACB, Govt. of Rajasthan, however, no such report of ACB was made available to the assessee at any stage. Assessee was not provided opportunity to controvert the report if any. There is violation of natural justice. Law does not allow such act. Thus it will be in the interest of equity and justice to restore the issue to the file of the AO to decide it afresh - Decided in favour of assessee for Statistical purposes.
|