Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1319 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAMValidity of reason of scrutiny selection - limited scrutiny v/s complete scrutiny - assessee’s case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued, served on the assessee and assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act was passed - As submitted that the assessee’s field of working is erroneously stated as real estate, whereas, the assessee is in the business of rural water scheme, which lacks the jurisdiction for scrutiny - HELD THAT:- We find that the assessee’s case was selected for complete scrutiny. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) on this ground and accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed.. Addition u/s 68 - unexplained cash credits - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, the assessee has filed PAN, Aadhar numbers and bank details of the creditors except two creditors i.e. Sri A.Nageswar Rao for an amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- and Sri Bommala Srinivasa Rao for an amount of ₹ 2,00,000/-. Therefore, all the transactions are explained except the above said two transactions for an amount of ₹ 4,00,000/-. But the Ld.CIT(A) as well as the AO simply ignored the bank statement and passed erroneous order. Therefore, we are of the view that except these two transactions, the remaining transactions are proved by the assessee. Therefore, we confirm the transactions of Sri A.Nageswar Rao and Sri Bommala Srinivasa Rao for an amount of ₹ 4,00,000/- (two lakhs each). For remaining amount, the assessee has explained the genuineness of the transactions and credit worthiness of the creditors. Therefore, we direct the AO to delete the addition made by the AO for other loan transactions for an amount of ₹ 29,32,906/-. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
|