TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 956X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1991-92 Rs. 25,000 2. Shri Manish J Shah, the learned Advocate contended that the learned CIT(A) has passed a consolidated order for assessment years 1988-89 to 1991-92. The additions on account of low withdrawals of household expenses of Rs. 3,000 and Rs. 5,000 were made in assessment years 1988-89 and 1989-90 by the Assessing Officer which were also confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee did not prefer any appeal in those two years because of smallness of the amount of additions made. The learned counsel submitted that the addition of Rs. 15,000 in assessment year 1990-91 and Rs. 25,000 in assessment year 1991-92 is most unjustified. He drew our attention to written submissions date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition to utilisation of amount out of my professional income as stated above. Thus, I had enough sources to meet with the expenses for maintenance of my family." 3. The learned counsel contended that if the amount of agricultural income received by the assessee is also taken into consideration, the total withdrawals made by him would be found to be substantially more than the household expenses estimated by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has not disputed the correctness of the facts stated in the aforesaid written submissions about the assessee having received substantial amount from his family s income from agriculture. There is no material or evidence on record to prove that the assessee has in fact spent more amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als shown by the assessee. The burden also lies on the Revenue to prove that the explanation of having received substantial sum out of agricultural income of the family, is not correct. The learned DR did not point out that the Assessing Officer had raised any further query after receiving letter dated 13-3-1995 nor required the assessee to submit any evidence in support thereof. Such burden has to be discharged by the Revenue to prove the existence of unexplained household expenses by bringing some material evidence on records. The Department has not discharged any such burden. We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that the entire amount of addition made in assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 on account of alleged low withdrawals f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
