TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings. The submission made by the assessee vide his letter dated 15.01.2007 was found correct. The addition made by the Assessing Officer is based on surmises and conjectures and is not based upon any cogent and convincing evidence on record. No distinguishable facts of any kind have been placed on record before us. Therefore in view of the said circumstances we of the view that the CIT(A) has passed the order in question correctly and judiciously which does not require to be interfere with at this appellate stage. - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A. No.7782/Mum/12 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2016 - SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM For The Assessee : Shri Yogesh Thar Fenil Bhatt For The Department : Shri Kama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the A.Y.2007-08. The Assessing Officer dealt this income as additional income and assessed the income to the tune of ₹ 77,63,940/-. Feeling aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who deleted the said addition, therefore the revenue has filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE NO.1 2:- 4. Issue no.1 and 2 are interconnected, therefore are being taken up together for adjudication. Under these issues the revenue has challenged the deletion of ₹ 50,00,000/- by the CIT(A) which was added by the Assessing Officer in view of the statement of one of the partner. The learned representative of the revenue has argued that CIT(A) has wrongly deleted the said addition, hence the order dated 30.10.2012 under c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT(A) has dealt this matter is also require to be seen. The finding of the CIT(A) in this regard is hereby reproduced below:- 2.9 I have gone through the facts of the issue. In this case, survey u/s.133A was conducted on 13.12.2006. In the answer to question no.10, the partner has stated that the collections from OPD for the entire amounting year will be around ₹ 30 to 35 lacs. In the answer to question no.12, the partner has replied that IPD collections for the entire accounting year will be around ₹ 80 to 85 lacs. It is seen from the P L for the Y.E. on 31.3.07, it is seen that total earning from the patients is ₹ 1,13,51,170/- which is almost tallying with the estimate made by the partner doing the survey. Furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... while estimating the tax on the said income and accordingly, the advance tax, the deduction for the remuneration which the partners would be entitled to on the entire income was not considered. It would be appreciated that in terms of section 40(b) of the I.T. Act, the remuneration to the partners is deductible expenses in the hands of the partnership firm and is to be taxed as income of the partners. As per Clause 7(A) of the Partnership Deed dated 01.04.1998, for the book profit above ₹ 1,50,000/-, 40% of the book profits would have to be distributed to the partners as remuneration. Thus, of the estimated income of ₹ 50 lacs, about ₹ 20 lacs would be paid to the partners as remuneration, resulting in reduction in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat, we have handed over to the Department a post dated cheque of ₹ 5 lacs for the third installment of advance tax payable in March 2007 and as explained herein, since we would not be required to pay the third installment, we request you that the post dated cheque no.052724 for ₹ 5 lacs, drawn on New India Cooperative Bank Limited, be returned so as to make sure that even inadvertently, on March 15, 2007, the same is not encashed. We request you to consider and record the above proposal and give effect to the Statement made on oath accordingly, for which act of kindness, we shall forever remain grateful. 2.10 This letter also makes it clear that the admitted estimated income during the survey is the net income before cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
