9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 693X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal income of Rs. 4,26,160/- besides the agricultural income. After issuing notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 assessment order came to be framed on 31.12.2010 whereunder claim of the assessee of having incurred expenses of Rs. 28,40,160/- towards "granite raising expenses" came to be disallowed and was held that the liability created by the assessee is an unproved liability and accordingly, the said sum was brought to tax. Being aggrieved by this order, an appeal came to be filed before the CIT (A), who by order dated 29.11.2011 upheld the addition and dismissed the appeal. Assessee pursued his grievance before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru 'C' Bench and the Tribunal on re-appreciation of entire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing for the revenue would support all the three orders passed by the authorities and contends that the finding recorded by the assessing Officer as well as first appellate authority are all questions of fact and as such, the Tribunal also did not find any substance in the contention raised by the assessee and submits that there is no substantial question of law involved in this appeal for being adjudicated and answered. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal. 5. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties and on perusal of the records, it would clearly indicate that the assessee had debited Rs. 28,40,160/- as 'granite raising expenses' which was said to have been incurred towards extraction of granite a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontended that amount was paid to Sri G Nagendra by crossed cheque. However, said Sri G Nagendra pleaded his ignorance with regard to filing of return of income by him and also stated that the assessee's brother Sri G Basavaraj (to whom the assessee had also paid a sum of Rs. 9,75,800/-) had obtained signatures in the guise of obtaining PAN card for him. This would only indicate that there has been inconsistency between the stand of the assessee and the statement furnished by Sri G Nagendra. 7. No other material evidence was produced by the assessee for verification by the assessing Officer and as such, the assessing Officer came to a conclusion that the liability created by the assessee is not genuine and has not been created in the no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would clearly indicate that copy of the statement recorded by assessing Officer was supplied to the assessee but the assessee did not chose to cross examine Sri Nagendra. Hence, assessee cannot be heard to contend that the order of the assessing Officer smacks of violation of principles of natural justice when the onus of proof is upon the assessee with regard to expenditure incurred and on failure to prove the same, the expenditure could not be allowed as has been done rightly so by the assessing Officer in the instant case. 10. The payments which the assessee claims to have paid to these three persons relates to granite extraction charges. This Court cannot lose sight of the fact that for extraction of granite apart from manual labour, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
