Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Sanjeev Kumar Versus The Income Tax Officer Ward 2 (4) , Ropar

2015 (8) TMI 1281 - ITAT CHANDIGARH

Rejection of books of accounts - profit rate estimation of 1.5% - Held that:- No opening stock inventory and closing stock inventory in quantity as well as in value was furnished. The assessee did not produce any stock register. The Assessing Officer considered that even if rebate and discount is reduced, then GP would work out to 0.29%.

Further, the last questionnaire issued by the Assessing Officer was not responded to by the assessee, therefore, it is clear from the findings of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

conduct of the assessee, in not filing complete details, we do not find any justification to interfere with the orders of authorities below - Decided against assessee

Disallowance of expenses and under section 40A(3) - Held that:- Once GP rate is applied, no further disallowance could be made out of various expenses as well as under section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. We, accordingly, following the decision in the case of Banwari Lal Banshidhar (1997 (5) TMI 37 - ALLAHABAD High Cou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been produced before us to explain the above issue, therefore, we do not find any error in the orders of the authorities below in making and confirming the addition. - Decided against assessee

Addition of deduction claimed under section 80C being the amount of tuition fees paid by the assessee for school going children - Held that:- The assessee did not furnish any evidence regarding payment of the tuition fee therefore, addition was made. No evidence was furnished before ld. CIT(App .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

SAINI,JM This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) Chandigarh dated 29.10.2012 for assessment year 2009-10. 2. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the findings of authorities below. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income of ₹ 3,01,620/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer issued detailed questionnaire on different dates. The assessee filed reply b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

peared on the date fixed for hearing before ld. CIT(Appeals) and even no written submissions have been filed. The ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, decided the appeal of the assessee virtually ex-parte. In the background of these facts, we proceed to decide the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in the present appeal. 3. Ground No. 1 is general and need no adjudication. 4. On ground No. 2, assessee challenged the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) in rejecting the books of accoun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

te and discount is reduced, then GP works out to 0.29% which was quite low. The Assessing Officer, therefore, invoked the provisions of Section 145 of the Act and rejected the books of account. The Assessing Officer applied GP rate of 2% resulting into addition of ₹ 29,27,768/-. No submissions have been made before ld. CIT(Appeals) to challenge the above addition made by the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(Appeals) finding no challenge to the addition before him, confirmed the addition in p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pon orders of the authorities below and submitted that since assessee did not produce sufficient material before the authorities below and no submissions have been made, therefore, appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 7. On consideration of the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the assessee on this ground. The Assessing Officer found the GP rate of the assessee to be low. No comparative case was filed. The assessee did not file complete details before A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the authorities below that assessee did not cooperate in finalization of the assessment and no complete details were furnished. Therefore, Assessing Officer was justified in rejecting the book results. Since complete details have not been furnished even before us, therefore, history of the assessee could not be considered favourably because for the year under assessment as well as for earlier years, no details have been produced before us in support of the claim made by the assessee. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issues are identical, therefore, we decide the same together. The assessee had claimed various expenses like telephone expenses, traveling expenses, insurance, office expenses and freight and cartage in a sum of ₹ 4,71,177/-. Since the assessee did not furnish vouchers and complete details, therefore, Assessing Officer disallowed 20% out of these expenses and made addition of ₹ 94,235/-. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also noted that the element of personal use out of telephone expenses canno .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oshiarpur ₹ 2,95,000/- and M/s S.M. Steel Traders (India), Mandi Gobindgarh in a sum of ₹ 15 lacs and ₹ 14 lacs. The Assessing Officer noted that despite giving specific opportunity to explain the payments made in cash, assessee did not file any reply therefore, addition of ₹ 34,95,000/- was made under section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. The ld. CIT(Appeals) also noted that since no evidence has been produced before him and no submissions have been made, therefore, addi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

submitted that M/s Shakti Trading Co. Hoshiarpur made payment to the assessee in a sum of ₹ 2,95,000/- which is clear from copy of account of this party (PB-63) and further submitted that in the case of M/s S.M. Steel Traders, the amount is paid by assessee through RTGS issued by his banker which is also clear from the copy of account of this party (PB-69). The ld. DR, however, submitted that since these evidences were not filed before authorities below, therefore, these may no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

imated by applying higher GP rate. The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT V Banwari Lal Banshidhar 229 ITR 229 held as under : Held, affirming the decision of the Tribunal, that no disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of Section 40A(3) read with rule 6DD(j) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, as no deduction was allowed to and claimed by the assessee. When the gross profit rate was applied, that would take care of everything and there was no need for the A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. We, accordingly, following the decision in the case of Banwari Lal Banshidhar (supra) set aside the orders of authorities below and delete the addition of ₹ 94,235/- and ₹ 34,95,000/-. The ground Nos. 3 & 6 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed. 12. On ground No.4, assessee challenged the addition of ₹ 25,00,000/- on account of cash credit under section 68 of the Act. The brief facts are that assessee had sho .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unt. Therefore, Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 of the Income Tax Act. Since no submissions have been made before ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, addition was confirmed and this ground of appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 13. We have heard ld. Representatives of both the parties. The ld. counsel for the assessee has shown his inability to produce any evidence regarding source of deposit of ₹ 25 lacs by Shri Ashok Bansal with the assessee. It is wel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version