Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 367 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAMValidity of notice u/s 148 - validity of notice served - non striking of irrelevant columns - Held that:- The intent and purpose of the notice issued was served and there is no injustice caused to the assessee - no material was placed to show that the assessee was misled in any manner for not specifically striking the irrelevant columns - therefore, we hold that the notice issued by the AO is valid and the same is upheld - Decided against the assessee. Additions u/s 69 - unexplained amounts of loans received - Held that:- As AR argued that the addition cannot be made u/s 69, and further, submitted that the entire sum of ₹ 2,10,000/- was opening balance but not the sums received in the year under consideration. Since the assessee has not furnished the information and the relevant material was not placed before the AO to examine the issue, we are of the considered opinion that the issue should be remitted back to the file of the AO Additions u/s 69A - Held that:- Assessee has collected the sums from the clients in the name of tax and has not deposited the same to the Government account or refunded to the respective clients, it constitutes the liability against the assessee but does not form part of income - hence we are of the considered opinion that the monies received by the assessee on behalf of the clients for payment of taxes to be treated as money belonged to the clients or belonged to the Income Tax Department and the same cannot be brought to tax as income in the hands of the assessee - thus we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and delete the addition made by the AO u/s 69A. Disallowance of depreciation - Held that:- Assessee did not produce any evidence for purchase of assets and put to use for the purpose of business - thus AO made the disallowance which is confirmed by CIT(A) - hence we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the same is upheld.
Addition of cash credit - Held that:- AO made the addition after issuing the show cause notice and giving number of opportunities to the assessee. It is the obligation on the part of the assessee to comply with the notices issued and present his case by furnishing the required information. Having failed to avail the opportunities given to the assessee both before the AO and the CIT(A) the assessee cannot take ‘U’ turn and make a new argument at this stage. No evidence has been produced before us to establish that the said sums were not credited in the books of accounts. The law cannot help a person who is sleeping over his rights Sale agreement and the advance received for sale of agricultural land we unable to accept the covenants of the unregistered sale agreement as genuine unless it is supported by Registered Sale deed. In the absence of sale deed, evidencing the actual amount passed on to the assessee, the sale agreement cannot be considered as a valid evidence and the Ld.AR did not produce any evidence to establish the source of credits. - Decided against assessee Disallowance of expenditure - Held that:- Since the AO has disallowed only 15% of the expenses and the assessee failed to produce any evidence with respect to the genuineness of expenses and we find the disallowance made by AO is justified and not inclined to disturb the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Agricultural income - Held that:- As the assessee failed to furnish any evidence with regard to the land holdings with pattadar passbooks and land revenue records. The assessee also failed to produce the details of crops grown, yield, expenditure etc. Therefore, we hold that the Ld.CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition. Investment made by the assessee in Nellimerla land - Held that:- In the instant case the sale deed was registered for ₹ 50000/- and no other evidence was brought on record by the AO to establish that the excess consideration was passed on to the vendor over and above the sale consideration recorded in the sale dee. The consideration recorded in the sale deed is to be treated as final and accordingly, the addition made by the AO is unsustainable and the same is deleted.
|