TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tries have to be telescoped and he has accordingly given relief of ₹ 15 lacs. We accordingly donot see any infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A) in the said finding and the same is hereby confirmed. Hence, ground of Revenue is dismissed. Addition in the trading account - Held that:- CIT(A) has given a categorical finding of fact that both the transactions are of the same period and the determination of undisclosed income ₹ 81,73,000/- is based on P&L account and balance sheet of same period. It is not only the case that the profit of ₹ 81,73,000/- is reflected or detected by way of any independent source of any other undisclosed income. Therefore the income already detected and taxed in the same A.Y. should be given credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rought to the notice of the Bench that the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in assessee s own case for the subject assessment year has decided the matter in ITA No. 267/JP/13 vide its order dated 28.02.2014 and therein the Revenue has submitted that it has not filed any appeal against the relief of ₹ 15 lacs granted to the assessee. In light of that, the Ld. AR submitted that the subject appeal should be dismissed in view of the said submission made by the ld. CIT(DR). After hearing both the parties and going through the order of the Coordinate Bench, it is noted that the issue before the Coordinate Bench was in respect of addition of ₹ 33,86,000 sustained by the ld CIT(A) and in that context, it was mentioned that relief of ₹ 15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is titled as Wig Brothers. There is no dispute that the documents contained dates specific cash entries with specific narration. It is also admitted fact that such cash transactions are no verifiable from the books of accounts. The objection of the appellant is that these papers can hardly be said to be belonging to the appellant as also that at the most on the basis of turnover recorded on such paper by way of amount invested in business, profit @ 10% of the amount could have been estimated/determined. It is also stated that cash entry stated to be dated 5.3.2008 is nowhere in the seized documents and cannot be added. The appellant also contended that when credit side cash entries are being taxed, credit for debit side cash entry sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de is to be given to the assessee. In fact allowing such benefit will only give telescopic benefit to the appellant in as much as it reflect only rotation of the same money in the same period. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances discussed above, the addition so made by the AO is accordingly restricted to ₹ 33,86,000/- (48,86,000 -15,00,000). The appellant accordingly gets relief of ₹ 15,00,000/-. This ground of appeal is partly allowed. 2.2 The ld CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the debit side entry dated 09.03.2008 for ₹ 15 lacs is of similar narration being cash amount transferred, Pradeep, Sanjay Goyal, cons by Ashishji. Even name is mentioned i.e. Sanjay Goyal, Ashishji Goyal are also common ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome is determined at ₹ 33,86,000/-. Further in the same A.Y. the AO has made addition of ₹ 81,73,000/- based on P L a/c and balance sheet of the same A.Y. In fact one of the P L account is for the period from 1.11.2007 to 31.3.2008 showing profit of ₹ 1.74 cr. Approximately and it is not only in the same A.Y. but also in close proximity of cash receipt in Feb. March, 2008. Both these documents are considered as of undisclosed nature and therefore the undisclosed income evidenced on the basis of seized document pages 59,60 61 of Annx. A-5 should be the part of P L account and balance sheet of same period. Both the transactions are of the same period and the determination of undisclosed income ₹ 81,73,000/- is bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have found it for a fact that the A.O. has not rejected the books of account of the assessee. For the A.Y. 2008-09, assessee s books are audited u/s 44AB of the Act and no adverse remark has been made by the Auditor (CA). Copy of the audit report is enclosed at paper book 7 to 23. Rather the AO has himself accepted the books of account. Therefore, we find force in the submission of ld. DR and that without rejection of books of account no such addition in the trading account only on the basis of retracted admission is justified. The assessee can legally retreat his statement of admission and disprove the same with the help of the evidence. The assessee has not only retracted from his admission but has proved that the admission made is wrong ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
