TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at source from Freight Charges – assesse placing reliance on Merilyn Shipping & Transports (2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM ) – Held that:- It is not clear from records whether the amount was paid during the year or not. Matter remitted back to file of AO Addition on account of low Household withdrawals – Held that:- In the present inflationary times, some minimum withdrawals are required by everybody. Since no details of withdrawals have been furnished, addition of Rs.1,00,000/- is restricted to Rs.50,000/- - Decided partly in favor of assessee - ITA No.197/CHD/2012 - - - Dated:- 13-6-2012 - SHRI H.L. KARWA, AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, JJ. Appellant by : Smt. Jyoti Respondent by : Shri Akhilesh Gupta ORDER PER T.R.S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herein it was held that the addition u/s 40(a) (ia) can be made in respect of amounts payable. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that it is not clear from records, whether the amount was paid during the year or not. Therefore, same may be sent for verification. 6. After considering the rival submissions, it is not clear from records whether the amount was paid during the year or not. Therefore, in interest of justice, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the fi le of AO for fresh examination and the same may be decided in the light of Special Bench decision in the case of Merilyn Shipping Transports (supra). 7. In Ground No.3, after hearing from both the parties, we find, during assessment proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions were reiterated. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions, restricted the addition to Rs.1,00,000/- vide para 2.04, which is as under : 2.04 No plausible explanation of the above deficiencies noted by the AO could be given by the appellant in the written submissions except to reiterate the submissions made before the AO during the assessment proceedings. In view of the above facts, it is held that trading results declared by the appellant are not subject to verification and hence the same are rejected. The case laws referred to by the appellant are of no help in view of the specific facts of the case of the appellant, as has been discussed above. As far as the trading addition made by the AO, the appellant in the written su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ties, we found that during assessment proceedings, AO not iced that assessee has shown household withdrawals only for Rs.81,000/- and after considering reply of the assessee, AO estimated the withdrawals at Rs.15,000/- per month, which would make the total expenditure required at Rs.1,80,000/- and accordingly, he made addition of Rs.1,00,000/-. On appeal , addition was confirmed by ld. CIT(A). 13. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that this addition has also been made on purely estimated basis. She further submitted that assessee is wife of Shri Des Raj and was living with her two grown-up sons. No expenditure was incurred on education. Moreover, her husband as well as both sons were income tax assessees and had also made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
