Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (12) TMI 1385 - AT - Income TaxAddition of bogus purchases - concerned parties were not available at the given address as found by the department during the post search enquiries - Held that:- In the present case no blank cheque books and vouchers of the alleged four concerns have been found. Therefore, the decision in the case of N.K. Proteins Ltd.[2003 (1) TMI 228 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C] cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. Similarly, in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd.[1996 (1) TMI 144 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-C] the purchases were made through brokers and such documents relating to the brokers were produced for the first time before the CIT(A) and it was also found that there was close link between the assessee company and one Mr. P. Therefore, the above decision relied on by the ld. DR is also not applicable to the facts of the present case. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) deleting the above addition on account of the purchase from the four parties. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld and the ground of appeal No.2 of the Revenue is dismissed. Addition invoking the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) - Addition on account of disallowance of salary - Held that:- Smt. Shibani Khosla was receiving salary and bonus from assessment year 2006-07 to 2010-11 ranging from ₹ 3,74,000/- during financial year 2006-07 which has gone up to ₹ 7,80,000/- in assessment year 2010-11. Even in the assessment order while the A.O. mentions that the kind of work rendered by Mrs. Khosla would have fetched her ₹ 3000/- to 5000/- per month in an industrial area of Ghaziabad. Thus, the A.O is not saying that Mrs. Khosla has not done any work for the assessee company. Therefore, he could not have disallowed the entire salary. Since the ld. CIT(A) after considering the totality of the facts of the case has restricted ₹ 1,80,000/- as against ₹ 4,20,000/- disallowed by the A.O., we are of the considered opinion that the order of the ld.CIT(A) is justified under the facts and circumstances of the case. - Decided against revenue
|