TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, total amounting to Rs.1,86,136/-, which is much higher than the estimated household expenses of Rs. 1,63,000 as added by the AO – In favor of assessee - I.T.A.No.394/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2012 - SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JJ. Appellant by: Shri K.V.S. Gupta Respondent by : Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Sr. DR O R D E R PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 11.10.2011 confirming the order of the assessing officer dated 21.12.2010 by which, besides the other additions, the AO made an addition of Rs.1,63,000 by observing that the assessee did not have substantial withdrawals to support the household expenditure. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounded off Rs. 5,16,000/- Assessed at Rs. 5,16,000/-. Issue necessary forms. Charge interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234D. Initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee invoked the CIT(A) and he deleted the addition pertaining to unexplained credit and business income of the assessee but on the other hand, he confirmed the addition pertaining to low household expenditure withdrawals amounting to Rs.1,63,000, interest from saving bank account of Rs.879/- and on account of inability of the assessee to furnish any documentary evidence to substantiate the allowance of Rs.6220/- u/s 80C of the Act and, accordingly, the appeal of the assessee was partly disallowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter through the bank account submitted during the proceeding (Banyan Tree School) which has also been ignored by the ld. ITO. 7. On opening of appeal, the AR also submitted before us that the ld. CIT(A) has not properly appreciated the information and evidence placed before her as she considered the evidence relating to cash withdrawals of Rs.80136/- only but she did not notice the cash withdrawal of Rs.1,08,000 made by the father of the assessee and evidence of Post Office MIS pass book related to the same withdrawals. Therefore, she ignored and failed to appreciate the fact that the total withdrawals made by the father of the assessee was amounting to Rs.1,86,136/- which are much higher than the estimated amount of Rs.1,65,000 as compu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant did not have substantial withdrawals to support the household expenditure and therefore added an amount of Rs. 1,63,000/-. Since it is a justified approach by the AO and the appellant did not furnish any material contradicting the same, no interference is made on this issue and addition made by the Assessing Officer is hereby confirmed. 9. Replying to the above arguments, the ld. DR supported the action of the AO and its confirmation by the impugned order regarding addition made on account of low withdrawals for household expenses. The ld. DR also submitted that the assessee failed to substantiate his arguments regarding sufficient withdrawals of amount to meet his household expenses as the assessee did not furnish the copies of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act that all the papers filed in the paper book spread on 73 pages were also filed before the lower authorities meaning thereby before the ld. CIT(A) and the AO. The ld. DR did not dispute this fact that all papers available in the paper book were very well placed before the ld. CIT(A) and the AO. 12. In view of above and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we observe that the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider and appreciate the evidence placed by the assessee. She was also not justified in disbelieving the fact that the father and mother of the assessee reside with the assessee, that they have sources of income and out of the income, they also made withdrawals from their bank and post office saving accounts to meet household expenses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
