9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 1,94,500/- made u/s 68 of the Act being amount received from following persons: The addition may kindly be deleted. 1. S.L. Rajyaguru HUF Rs.69,500/- 2. Labhuben Thaker Rs.1,00,000/- 3. Manjulaben Joshi Rs.25,000 Total RS.1,94,5,00/- 3. The facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer has taken gross receipt at Rs. 50,00,000/- as against the gross receipt shown by the assessee at Rs. 38,53,476/- and has taxed the net profit @ 12.5% of Rs. 50.00 lakh and the income was assessed at Rs. 6,25,000/- on this account. Thereafter, in appellate proceedings, Tribunal has directed the Assessing Officer to estimate the total sales at Rs. 42.00 lakh and the net profit rate of 11% as held by the CIT(A) has been confirmed. Hence, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce, the same was not readily available therefore he could not furnish the relevant details before him. However, after verification from old records, the assessee could able to find out the evidences which are explained as under: S.No. Name of the depositor Amount Remarks 1 Smt. J. S. Rajyaguru 4,45,895/- Both the original assessments i.e. that of the appellant and the depositor were finalised on 31.03.2000. Copy of the ROI, assessment order and contra / confirmation are attached at Page? to 15"). The assessment in her case reached finality vide CIT(a)'s order dated 01.10.J34 in appeal No.CIT(A)- 1/Rjt/23V01-02 (copy attached at Page 16 to 17) 2. S. L. Rajyaguru HUF 69,500/- The amount in question is just a book transfer e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Smt. J.S. Rajyaguru an addition of Rs. 4,45,895/- was made u/s 144 r.w.s. 254 of the Act because no details were submitted by the assessee. Certain details were filed by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings were sent to the Assessing Officer for obtaining his comments by way of remand report dated 18/1/2013, the A..O. has commented that the assessee had failed to avail the opportunities given at the time of assessment proceedings also, for the year 1997-98, from a return of income and the income profile, it cannot be said that creditworthiness of Smt. I. S. Rajyaguru is proved and the addition thus should be sustained. The assessee has contended that in case of Smt. Rajyaguru, she was assessed to tax since many years. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, however, would have been different if those creditors were not income tax assessee or if they had not disclosed those transactions in their income tax returns of if such returns were not accepted by their Assessing Officer.
8. In view of the aforesaid facts, we allow the appeal of the assessee as assessee has given all details pertaining to transaction and thereafter it was the duty of the Assessing Officer to verify details submitted by the assessee but Assessing Officer failed to verify the same. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and allow the appeal of the assessee with the aforesaid direction.
9. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed.
This Order pronounced in open Court on 16.08.2016. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
