TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed has not been proved Addition u/s 68 - source of capital introduced during the year - part of it explained through gift received from his father out of sale proceeds of agricultural land - addition made in absence of evidences - Held that:- During proceedings assessee contended the same to be advance against sale proceeds of agricultural land. Matter is set aside to the A.O. to give one more opportunity to the appellant to produce the evidence - Decided in favor of assessee for statistical purposes - ITA No. 2756/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 3-7-2012 - Shri D.K.Tyagi and Shri T.R. Meena, JJ. Appellant Shri B.R. Popat, A.R. Respondent Shri S.K. Gupta, CIT D.R. ORDER PER : T.R.Meena, Accountant Member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the particulars of the truck numbers. Therefore, the assessee had made default for not deducting TDS u/s 194(c) of the IT Act, 1961. The A.O. had given show cause notice to the assessee for disallowing the expenses under Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act and for not deducting TDS u/s. 194(c) of the IT Act. The assessee s reply was considered and it was not found convincing to the A.O. Therefore, he made addition of ₹ 8,74,76,630/- in the total income of the assessee under Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carries the matter before the CIT(A) who had given detailed findings on page nos. 2 to 34 and not only confirmed the addition under Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e file the Form 15-J with the wrong authority and for the lapse why should he be given exemption from taxation specially when the scrutiny of Forms 15-I filed show that they are not authentic and do not furnish complete details / particulars. The appellant has taken very lightly the seriousness of Form 15-I or Form 15-J. As per Annexure of the AO one person owns more than two trucks and this is proved even on analysis of the copies of 15-I forms furnished as sample by the appellant during the appellate proceedings. Rather the incomplete absolutely unreliable not inspiring any confidence forms bearing no dates furnished by the appellant compel me to state that the addition is warranted not just u/s.40(a)(ia) but also alternatively u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial Bench, Visakhapatnam, decision in case of M/s. Merilyn Shipping Transports Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 477/Viz/2008, where Co-ordinate Bench strict interpreted word payable used in Section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961 in its natural meaning and held that Section 40(a)(ia) is applicable only expenditure payable as on 31st March of every year and cannot be invoked to disallow the amounts which had already been paid during the previous year, without deducting tax at source. He further relied on Co-ordinate D Bench, ITAT, Ahmadabad, decision in case of N.K. Jewellers Vs. Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 638/Ahd/2009, Kranti Road Transport Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 358/Vizag/2008 Gujarat Roadlines Vs. The Income Tax Officer in ITA No. 3023 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained the source of ₹ 2,07,989/- which was IT refund for AY 03-04 and his savings. The appellant explained that ₹ 3,27,000/- introduced by him from gift received from his father which was out of sale proceeds of agricultural land. But no evidence of source had been furnished before the A.O. by the appellant. Therefore, he made the addition of ₹ 3,27,000/-. 9. Being aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carries the matter before CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) further allowed the relief of ₹ 75,000/- on the amount of gift received from his father who owned agricultural land and gift declaration were filed before the A.O. The remaining amount of ₹ 2,52,000/- had been confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) as no expla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
