Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (11) TMI 541 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAMUnaccounted cash - telescoping benefit to the assessee - Held that:- A.O. has not disputed this and there is no reference in the assessment order to indicate the contrary as the balance cash found during the search represents current year’s professional receipts and has been duly taken into account in the return filed. There is no scope for making the impugned addition under the provisions of the Act. A.O. is directed to delete the addition of ₹ 9,65,955/-. In the result, the addition to the tune of ₹40,000/- sustained against the impugned addition of ₹ 19,75,955/-. CIT(A) gave a categorical finding that the cash found during the course of search represents part of such professional receipts have been accounted by the assessee and filed the return of income. This fact is not disputed by the A.O. as found by the CIT(A). Once a part of income is already disclosed in the return of income, no separate addition can be made. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A) and this ground of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed. Unexplained investment in gold jewellery - Held that:- CIT(A) has considered the entire facts of the case and he has rejected the additional claim of 200gms. made by the assessee before the A.O. In so far as telescoping of an amount of ₹ 8,84,371/-, which pertains to income offered for A.Y. 2010-11 and also an amount of ₹ 3,91,675/- with reference to addition made undisclosed income for A.Y. 2010-11 telescoping benefit was given by the CIT(A) on the ground that there is no evidence on record to show that the above amounts are utilized for any other investment or expenditure. Even before us, the department is not able to produce any evidence that the above amounts offered for taxation in the assessment year 2010-11, which are used for any other investment or expenditure. So under these facts and circumstances of the case, the telescoping benefit given by the CIT(A) to the extent of ₹ 8,84,371/- and also ₹ 3,91,675/- is justified and no interference is called for. Accordingly, this ground of appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Addition towards unaccounted outpatient receipts - Held that:- A.O. has not accepted the explanation given by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has only paid advance tax of ₹ 2 lakhs, therefore, the assessee will offer the professional receipts for taxation only ₹ 15 lakhs and he is of the opinion that the balance of {₹ 23,16,550 (-) 15 lakhs = ₹8,16,550/-} is treated as undisclosed income. When the assessee himself accepted that he will file a return of income and same will be considered for the taxation, the A.O. without considering the explanation given by the assessee on the ground that advance tax paid and addition was made in our opinion, which is baseless, unreasonable and unjustified. On the contrary, CIT(A) considered the explanation of the assessee and deleted the addition made by the A.O. by observing that the amount which is found during the course of search has taken into account by filing the return of income. No addition is warranted. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A) and this ground of appeal raised by the revenue is dismissed. Unaccounted professional receipts - Held that:- A.O. has not accepted the explanation given by the assessee on the ground that neither the hospital has maintained the books of accounts nor assessee has maintained the books, therefore, addition is made. On appeal, the CIT(A) has gave a categorical finding that these amounts found during the course of search pertains to current year, though these receipts were not recorded in the regular books of accounts of the hospital or of the assessee they have included and considered as a part of current year’s receipts while filing the return of income. Subsequent to the search, the assessee has complied these receipts in his books of accounts and offered them for tax in the return of income filed. In view of the above specific finding of the Ld. CIT(A), when the amount is found during the course of search pertains to current year, the same is offered for taxation by filing the return of income, it cannot be said that it is undisclosed income, when the time is available for the assessee to file a return of income. Admission of income u/s 132(4) - declaration of income in the return - A.O. is of the view that the assessee had admitted the income of ₹ 24,72,629/- against the declaration of income of ₹ 50 lakhs in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) - Held that:- The above issue is neither emanated from the assessment order nor from the CIT(A)’s order and has no impact on assessment made u/s 143(3). D.R. during the appeal hearing could not relate to the addition made in the assessment order. However, on verification of the assessment order, it is noted that the assessee had admitted income of ₹ 89,92,920/- against the declared income of ₹ 50 lakhs u/s 132(4) of the Act and consequential order resulted in total income of ₹ 1,35,00,044/-.
|