TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mobile expenses, conveyance and miscellaneous expenses. The assessee could not produce proper and satisfactory evidence/explanations before the authorities below to prove that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business. Ad-hoc addition has been made @ 25% of the total expenditure by the authorities below on the ground that personal usage cannot be ruled out. However, no deficiency has been pointed out by the A.O. which is specific to any bill/voucher submitted by the assessee, but keeping in view satisfactory details about expenditure being incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business was not submitted by the assessee, personal usage with respect to these expenses being incurred for personal purposes instead of business purposes cannot be completely ruled out. In view thereof interest of justice will be best served if the disallowance of the afore-stated expenses is restricted to 10% of the total expenditure - Decided partly in favour of assessee Addition on account of excess rent paid - Held that:- The assessee failed to submit the details of the working of increased rent being excess payment of ₹ 8,000/- over and above t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the addition of a sum of ₹ 69,713 / - out of expenses for want of justification. 3. The Ld.CIT (Al erred in confirming addition of a sum of ₹ 8000/- on account of excess rent paid. 4. The Ld.CIT (Al erred in confirming adding to total income a sum of ₹ 50,000/ - which is shown as sundry deposits in the Balance Sheet. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of M/ s Global Tech Solution, engaged n the profession of software and hardware consultant and derives total income from profession and other sources. 4. The AO observed from the ITS details of the assessee that the assessee had received contractual receipts of ₹ 11,7981 - from Kaapi Machines (India) Pvt. Ltd. and the same was not offered by the assessee for taxation. The assessee submitted that in respect of TDS of -Kaapi Machines (India) Private Limited appearing in AIR Information, the bill was raised but no payment was received by the assessee from Kaapi Machines(India) Private Limited, and the bill was cancelled later on. But the assessee failed to produce before the AO cancellation letter from Kaapi Machines (India) Private Limited. During the course of heari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O. asked the assessee to furnish complete details like bills, vouchers etc. for verification and also to establish that the same were incurred for business purposes. However, the assessee failed to produce any such details/ explanation. Accordingly, the A.O. added ₹ 69,713/- being 25% of the total expenditure of ₹ 2,78,851/- to total income of the assessee for want of justification and supporting bills, vide assessment order dated 13.12.2011 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. On first appeal being filed by the assessee with the learned CIT(A) , the Id. CIT(A) also upheld the additions as made by the A.O. on the grounds that the assessee had failed to prove that the expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business and also the assessee could not produce complete details and bills/vouchers, vide appellate orders dated 30- 01-2014 passed by the learned CIT(A). Aggrieved by the appellate orders dated 30-01-2014 passed by the Id. CIT(A) the assessee filed second appeal before the tribunal. Before the tribunal, the Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that addition of ₹ 69,713/ - has been made @ 25% of the total expenses of ₹ 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. On appeal before the Id. CIT(A) filed by the assessee, the assessee submitted that there was an old agreement of rent while the landlord has not entered into new rent agreement after the rent was increased and the excess rent of ₹ 8,000 / - was as per new rent agreed by the assessee with the landlord albeit there is no written rent agreement but the rent was paid by banking channel through account payee cheques. The Id. CIT(A) rejected contentions of the assessee in the absence of satisfactory explanation and evidences submitted by the assessee and accordingly the assessment order of the A.O. was confirmed by the learned CIT(A) vide appellate orders dated 30-01-2014 passed by learned CIT(A). Aggrieved by the appellate order dated 30-01-2014 passed by the Id. CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal before the Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has made payment of ₹ 8000/- towards rent which is an increased rent paid through banking channel through account payee cheque. It was submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that the rent agreement was old and the landlord had not bothered to make any formal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of the assessee raised vide ground no 4, the A.O. observed from the Balance Sheet of M/s Global Tech. Solutions and other Balance Sheet of Global Tech. Solutions that the assessee had shown sundry deposit of ₹ 25,000 j - each in both the balance sheets'. When asked by the A.O., the assessee could not submit any satisfactory explanation regarding the source/evidence thereof these sundry deposits of ₹ 50,000/-. The A.O. accordingly treated it as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act and added back the same to the income of the assessee, vide assessment order dated 13.12.2011 passed by the AO u/ s 143(3) of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 13.12.2011 passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3) of the Act, the assessee filed first appeal before the Id. CIT(A). The Id. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order of the A.O. as the assessee could not submit evidence/ satisfactory explanation with respect thereof these two sundry deposits of ₹ 25,000/- each appearing in its Balance Sheets vide appellate orders dated 30-01-2014 passed by learned CIT(A). Aggrieved by the appellate orders dated 30-01-2014 passed by the Id. CIT(A), the assessee filed second appeal befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
