Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
CGST - Acts + GST Rates GST Ntf. GST Forms GST - Manual GST - FAQ State GST Acts SGST Ntf. I. Tax Manual
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ACIT Circle-5 Kolkata Versus Vishnu Webtech Pvt. and Vica-Versa

TM - Unexplained investment - CIT(A) deleted the addition - additional evidence - assessee-company has supported the impugned order of CIT(A) stating that there was no additional evidence filed by the assessee before CIT(A) and CIT(A) having given relief to the assessee relying on the same evidence which was available before AO, there is no violation of Rule 46A of the IT Rules - Held that:- Keeping in view this assertion made by the assessee-company in its CO which was reiterated by Ld. Counsel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e impugned order of CIT(A) to show that there was no new evidence filed by the assessee for the first time before CIT(A) and this position clearly evident from the order of the CIT(A) has not been rebutted or controverted out by the Ld. DR. We therefore find no merit in this appeal filed by Revenue and upholding the impugned order of CIT(A), we dismiss the said appeal. - Decided against revenue - ITA No1241/Kol /2010 & C.O. No.82/Kol/2010 - Dated:- 20-10-2015 - Shri P.M.Jagtap, Accountant Member .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ome for the year under consideration was filed by it on 26.10.2005 declaring total income of ₹ 13,75,020/-. In the assessment original completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.12.2007, total income of assessee was determined by Assessing Officer at ₹ 39,24,108/- after making additions of ₹ 25,49,088/- to the income returned by the assessee. The said assessment was subsequently set aside by CIT vide his order passed u/s 263 of the Act with a direction to the AO to re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

& 2004-05. In the details so furnished, the source of funds was explained by the assessee as share capital of ₹ 150 lakh, share premium of ₹ 150 lakhs, internal accrual of ₹ 41 lakh, advance of ₹ 34 lakh and current liability of ₹ 16 lakh. It was claimed that said sources of funds was sufficient to fully cover the expenditure of ₹ 3.48 crores incurred by the assessee on construction during the year under consideration. This claim of the assessee was not f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was made by him to the total income of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act vide order dated 27.11.2009. 3. Against the order passed by AO u/s. 143(3) r.ws. 263 of the Act, an appeal was preferred by assessee before CIT(A) disputing the addition of ₹ 3.48 crores made by AO on account of alleged unexplained investment in construction. After considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the materials available on record, Ld. CIT(A) deleted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

en from the details of fun flow statement and bank accounts filed before me, the appellant filed the same details before the Assessing Officer. Assessee also submitted that cash flow statement along with cash book, bank books were produced before the A.O during the course of assessment proceedings. The AO in his order has not pointed out any unexplained credit or negative cash balance of the appellant in cash book. The appellant submitted the dates of share application money received by account .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he Fyr-2003-04 and 2004-05. The appellant submitted the ledger extract record of share application money received from all the Promoters. The assessing officer referring to the letter field by the appellant dated 22.10.2009 has concluded that the assessee himself accepted that expenditure was incurred by the assessee after 30.09.2004. However, as seen from the letter dated 22.10.2009 the assessee filed details and evidences to show that all assets were put to use before 30.09.2004. The appellant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s in the books of accounts. The observation of the AO that the assessee has received funds only on 07.03.2005 is without any basis or fact brought on record. As seen from the balance-sheet there was capital work in progress of ₹ 2,47,72,922/- and pre-operative expenses of ₹ 6,49,469/- incurred in earlier years and brought forward as capital work in progress. The expenditure incurred in earlier years cannot be added as income from the assessment year 2005-06 u/s. 69 of the I.T. Act. T .....

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 AO has also allowed the depreciation as claimed by the appellant. The share capital was received by the appellant during the financial year 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05. This is evident from the fund flow statement and the balance sheet submitted by the appellant for the relevant assessment year during the course of appellate proceedings. The observation of the A.O that the assessee received funds only on 07.03.2005 is factually incurred and the AO is not justified in making an addition u/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| 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