TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only so much of the balance of ₹ 2,01,414 pertaining to consultancy work. Counsel for the assessee though contended that the disallowance is arbitrary could not establish before us that the accounts are correct and complete. Details of expenditure and the purpose for which it was spent, were also not available on record. Therefore, in our view, the Tribunal rightly disallowed a sum of ₹ 2 lakhs towards civil work and allowed at least 50 per cent of the claim attributable to consultancy work. We find, no substantial question of law involved in the finding of the Tribunal. Therefore, we answer this question in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Accrual of income - Amount received for execution of the work - whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 44AD as a guideline for estimation of income from civil work. We, therefore, find no justification to interfere with this part of the order of the Tribunal. It is worthwhile to note that while confirming the estimation of income at reduced percentage, the Tribunal cancelled separate addition made by the AO under the head 'Other income' which is a huge amount of ₹ 15,44,353. We are of the view that after getting deletion of addition of ₹ 15,44,353, the assessee cannot canvass for modification of other part of the order of the Tribunal confirming estimation of income at the reduced percentage of 8 per cent which is a reason for deleting the separate addition without considering it independently on merit. - C. N. Ramac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd to the disallowance of ₹ 2 lakhs sustained by the Tribunal and another pertains to addition of ₹ 6 lakhs sustained by the Tribunal, both by reversing the order of the first appellate authority. The Tribunal found that even though the assessee was engaged in consultancy work, it was also executing civil work. The assessee has not maintained separate books of accounts for both the activities. Therefore, the Tribunal found that what is required is only reasonable allocation of expenditure between civil work and consultancy work. The AO had in fact treated the entire expenditure of ₹ 4,01,414 as attributable in civil work and when net income was estimated from civil work, there is no scope for granting further deduction and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y for implementation of a project which was not in fact carried out by the assessee. Even though the assessee maintained that the amount received does not constitute income, the fact remains that the assessee had not shown it as repayable to the said company nor has he repaid the amount to the said company. The question raised is, whether the amount received by the assessee for execution of the work, if materialised, can be treated as income. The assessee has no case that the amount is repaid or repayable. The Tribunal rightly found that it is business income assessable under s. 28(i)/(iv) of the IT Act. We find no justification to interfere with the order of the Tribunal, We therefore answer this question also against the assessee. Consequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 377; 57.25 lakhs towards the labour charges for earthmoving. We do not know how labour charges got accumulated for the whole accounting year to justify payment of cash of ₹ 57.25 lakhs on the last date of the previous year. In our view, when the cash payment of ₹ 80.16 lakhs on a single day itself gave rise to doubt in the mind of the AO, he rightly cross-checked the genuineness of the payments by issuing summons to the persons whose names were shown in the vouchers prepared by the assessee. The result was that partly, vouchers were found to be bogus, and partly stand disproved. We do not know on what ground the appellants can seek for acceptance of books of accounts which was found to be unworthy of credit by three lower author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the view that after getting deletion of addition of ₹ 15,44,353, the assessee cannot canvass for modification of other part of the order of the Tribunal confirming estimation of income at the reduced percentage of 8 per cent which is a reason for deleting the separate addition without considering it independently on merit. 7. So far as appeal for 1995-96 is concerned, the question raised is only on estimation of income for the reasons stated in the year 1994-95. While disposing of the appeal, the Tribunal reduced the income at 8 per cent. Since we have confirmed the order of the Tribunal for the year 1994-95, we confirm the order for 1995-96 as well. Consequently, the appeals for these two years are also dismissed. - - Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
