Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 778 - AT - Income TaxAdmission of additional evidences - no justification for non submission of details before AO - HELD THAT:- Ld. CIT(A) directed the AO to examine the evidences and submit his comments and accordingly, the AO has submitted its Report vide letter dated 28.7.2017 has submitted that the assessee has failed to specify any of the circumstances mentioned in Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules from Clauses (a) to (d). Further the assessee has not given justification before the Ld. CIT(A) as to why it failed to submit the evidences before the AO which he intends to submit before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the absence of any such justification, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the request of the assessee for admitting the additional evidences, which does not need any interference on my part, hence, I uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of dispute and reject the ground (A) raised by the assessee. Disallowance of expenses - HELD THAT:- Details and vouchers have not been linked to verify the genuineness and quantum and the bills and vouchers are a few only. Hence, CIT(A) has rightly held that expenses as made by the AP appears to be reasonable and appropriate and therefore, the addition was correctly confirmed by CIT(A), which does not need any interference on my part, hence, uphold the action of the CIT(A) on the issue of dispute and reject the ground raised by the assessee. Addition on account of share capital and share premium - Addition u/s 68 - HELD THAT:- In the appellate proceedings, the assessee has also filed additional evidences in the form of share valuation report dated 20.3.2014 alongwith confirmation from the share holder namely Mr. Subhash Chander Randeva but with no confirmation from the creditors, hence, the additional evidences have not been admitted, as aforesaid. CIT(A) has rightly held that in the absence of any explanation to the nature and source of the credits and genuineness of transaction, he confirmed the addition of ₹ 22,00,000/-, which does not need any interference on my part, hence, uphold the action of the CIT(A) on the issue of dispute and reject the ground (D) raised by the assessee. Appeal of the Assessee is dismissed.
|