Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 376 - ITAT AHMEDABADRevision u/s 263 - AO made an adhoc disallowance when the assessee failed to maintain salary ledger and vouchers thereby directed to make addition of salary paid by cash - 17th time of hearing of the above appeal - HELD THAT:- We have observed that adhoc disallowance to the tune of Rs. 84,000/- is upheld by ld. CIT(A). The assessee has claimed total salary of Rs. 3,43,600/- and the assessee on its part produced vouchers and details. We have observed that the assessee is in the business of cable network services and the total turnover of the assessee was Rs. 5,06,29,889/-, while total salary claimed was Rs. 3,43,600/- which is a meager sum vis-à-vis total turnover. No specific defect has been pointed by the authorities below and adhoc disallowance is made. Keeping in view smallness of the amount vis-à-vis turnover achieved and on preponderance of probabilities also keeping in view that adhoc disallowance is made by the authorities below, we are inclined to delete the addition of Rs. 84,000/- as sustained by ld. CIT(A). The assessee succeeds on this issue. We order accordingly. Additions to Partner’s Capital account - additions sustained by ld. CIT(A) were towards goodwill earned from Den Digital which stood credited to the capital accounts of the partners for which no taxes were paid - The amount is credited in the books of the assessee, and the onus is on the assessee to substantiate that the said amount has suffered taxation, which assessee fails to prove and bring on record cogent evidences to substantiate that said amount has already suffered taxation. Thus, we don’t find any infirmity in the well-reasoned appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) confirming additions which we sustain. The assessee fails on this issue. We order accordingly. Remaining amount of additions as sustained by CIT(A), it is observed that the cash stood credited in the Partners Current Account namely Mr. Kamlesh Patel and Mr. Manojbhai Patel respectively, for which the assessee could not explain sources of cash credits in the Partners Current Account. Thus, it is a case of cash being received by the assessee ostensibly from Partners, for which no cogent explanation was forthcoming from the assessee to substantiate the sources of cash and the amount stood credited in the books of accounts of the assessee. Thus, the onus is squarely on the assessee to prove and substantiate with cogent evidences as to sources of the cash receipts as well as to satisfy the mandate of Section 68 to the satisfaction of the authorities, which does not stood satisfied as the assessee failed to substantiate. Before us, the assessee did not appear and based on material on record, we have no hesitation in upholding this addition as was sustained by Ld. CIT(A) as we do not find any infirmity in the well-reasoned appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A), which we sustain. The assessee fails on this issue. We order accordingly. Appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed.
|