9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c Chikitsak Sangh. A survey under s. 133A was conducted on 26th Jan., 200l. The assessee had. filed return of income on 31st Aug., 2001, declaring an income of Rs. 1,96,475. During the course of survey, it was found that in asst. yrs. 1998-99 and 1999-2000, the assessee had shown agricultural income but did not own any agricultural land. A salary paid to his wife was found on higher side. Therefore, during survey he surrendered a sum of Rs. 1,35,000 for asst. yr. 2001-02, as his additional income. He also deposited advance tax of Rs. 40,000 on this amount on 15th March, 200l. 3. On examination of patient's register, it was found that the assessee mentioned only the name and prescription along with the fees charged from a patient. Complete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fees, etc. for 353 working days at the rate of Rs. 55 (Rs. 25 + Rs. 30), accordingly he worked out consultation fees at Rs. 4,85,375. The assessee has declared gross consultation fees at Rs. 3,54,158, so an addition of Rs. 1,31,217 was made. The AO also estimated profit on the sale of medicines, by applying the rate of Rs. 30 to each patient and adopting rate of profit at 20 per cent at the estimated sum of Rs. 5,82,450 (55 patients x 353 days x Rs. 30), and thus arrived at a sum of Rs. 1,16,490 which represented profit earned on sale of medicines to patients. 5. The case of the assessee is that the consultation charges also include the profit on sale of medicines. The AO gave weight to the statements of the assessee recorded during surve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 145(1) of the Act. The statements of the assessee himself, recorded during survey coupled with the fact of surrender by the assessee, justifies this action of the AO, particularly, when no proper registers of accounts are maintained. The learned CIT(A) has meticulously examined each detail, be it the estimation of patients receipts or the profit element from the sale of medicines. But only argument of the learned Authorised Representative, which seems to be somewhat considerable is that the assessee being an ayurvedic practitioner, does not charge consultancy fees but whatever profit, at the rate of 40 per cent he charges on the sale of medicines is his only gross receipt. The certificate issued by the Rajasthan Ayurvedic Chikitsak Sangh ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disclosed sources. The AO observed that the assessee has recorded salary of Rs. 1,000 per month paid to compounder Shri Ram Kumar and same salary paid to Shri Ram Dutt, Munim, and there was some, small difference of salary stated to have been paid during survey and stated during the course of assessment proceedings. The details furnished during assessment proceedings in respect of salary are: Shri Vinod Kumar Rs. 2,250 per month Shri Suresh Kumar Rs. 1,600 per month Smt. Asha Uppal Rs. 2,500 per month 10. At the time of the survey, the assessee had stated the following amounts as salary to the following persons. Smt. Asha Uppal & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vide letter dt. 3rd Oct., 2003. The copy of this letter has been placed on record. From the above facts what we capture is that the AO has added this amount only on the basis of doubts and suspicion. When the salary was paid and signatures of the employees were obtained, the AO must have seen the same on records that is why he did not object to the salary paid to Vinod Kumar although the assessee had claimed that he had only three employees including the compounder Shri Ram Kumar. The claim of the assessee seems to be more convincing. Hence, we allow the ground of appeal and delete this addition. 14. Ground No. (6) of this appeal relates to addition made on account of salary paid to Smt. Asha Uppal wife of the assessee. The AO observed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to be allowed. The salary of Rs. 2,500 per month cannot be said to be on the higher side even. 17. Ground No. (7) relates to an addition of Rs. 8,400 made on account of rental income. The learned Authorised Representative has straightway prayed that 1/3rd deduction should be allowed as per law from the rental income. This being justified claim, we allow 1/3rd deduction out of Rs. 8,400 towards maintenance, etc. and sustain the remaining amount. 18. In ground No. (8) read as under: "That the learned AO has erred in not giving the credit of Rs. 1,35,000 surrendered by the assessee at the time of survey and the learned CIT(A) has further erred in not giving any finding about the adjustment." 19. This issue is stated to be covered by a d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
