Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 2025 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained cash credits addition u/s. 68 - as argued CIT(A) did not call for the necessary remand report from the assessing authority - HELD THAT:- Assessee had received the amount in question from its director namely Sri Biswanath Beriwal for meeting its day-to-day expenses whose details already stood filed before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment. Be that as it may, the fact remains that identity of assessee’s director is nowhere in dispute. We therefore hold that genuineness and creditworthiness identity of the assessee’s director hereinabove is nowhere in issue. Nor is there any material indicating admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules. We therefore affirm the CIT(A)’s lower appellate findings under challenge regarding the instant issue. Disallowance u/s 43B - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- We notice herein as well that there is no rebuttal on Revenue’s part qua the CIT(A)’s clinching finding that the amount in question nowhere formed part of assessee’s deduction claim(s) pertaining to impugned assessment year 2013-14. We affirm the CIT(A)’s findings under challenge on this count alone. Disallowance of expenditure made in the course of assessment - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- We notice herein as well that Revenue’s has no case on merits since the assessee; who had not derived any business income in the relevant previous year, incurred the impugned expenditure alike telephone, electricity charges and other expenses for running its business whose details already formed part of record before the Assessing Officer. We thus reject Revenue’s instant third substantive ground as well. Addition of cessation of liability u/s 41(1) - AO stand appears to have taken note of the only fact that these liabilities continued to exist for the last many years - CIT A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- We find no merits in the instant argument. We quote this tribunal’s co-ordinate bench’s decision in ACIT vs. M/s Soorajull Nagarmull [2018 (7) TMI 2063 - ITAT KOLKATA] where in held that the mere fact of a liability having continued to be shown for very many years would not attract section 41(1) since it is for the Assessing Officer has who has to show that concerned assessee has drawn any benefit by way of cessation or remission thereof. We further make it clear that CIT(A)’s above extracted detailed discussion has examined all the facts as well as the relevant legal position at length which has nowhere been rebutted from the Revenue side. We therefore conclude that the CIT(A) has rightly reversed the assessment findings holding the amount in question to be a case of cessation of liability u/s 41(1) of the Act. - Decided against revenue.
|