Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 573 - ITAT MUMBAIDisallowance made out of salary and wages - Held that:- Considering the characteristics of contract works, we find some merit in the contentions of the learned authorised representative. Hence the disallowance of entire amount, in our view, is not justified. However, as pointed out by the Assessing Officer, there appears to be some deficiencies in the maintenance of vouchers, for example, the vouchers contain only the name of the labourer without any address. Hence it will be difficult for anybody to verify the genuineness of the payment. Hence, in order to put this issue at rest, we are of the view that a round sum disallowance of Rs. one lakh in order to cover up the deficiency, if any, in respect of claim relating to salary and wages expenditure may be made and the same, in our view, would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance out of salary and wages expenditures to Rs. one lakh. - Decided in favour of assessee in part Disallowance of value added tax payable amount made under section 43B - Held that:- The assessee had claimed input credit of ₹ 5,67,185, whereas the value added tax auditor determined that the input credit was available to the assessee only to the extent of ₹ 3,68,505. Further, there was difference with regard to value added tax amount paid by the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer has determined the value added tax amount payable at the year end at ₹ 1,92,087. It is not the case of the assessee that he has not accepted the value added tax audit report. Having accepted the value added tax audit report, in our view, the assessee was not justified in denying the value added tax liability shown in the audit report. Further, the assessee has not shown to us that the computations given in the value added tax audit report was not accepted by the Sales Tax Department. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was justified in confirming the addition of balance amount of ₹ 98,689 by invoking the provisions of section 43B of the Act. - Decided in favour of revenue Addition of capital introduced by the assessee - Held that:- Since the assessee has filed returns of income in the earlier years by computing income under section 44AD of the Act and since the assessee has shown that he has withdrawn the funds from his bank account in the month of March, 2007, we do not find any reason to disbelieve the explanations of the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made on this account.- Decided in favour of assessee
|