9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 714X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al on record. The learned representatives of both the parties submitted that the issue is the same in all the appeals. Both parties have mainly argued in I. T. A. No. 307/Chd/2014, therefore, for the purpose of disposal of all the appeals, the appeal in I. T. A. No. 307/Chd/2014 is decided as under : I. T. A. No. 307/Chd/2014 (assessment year 2006-07) 3. In this appeal the assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 25,72,821 as unexplained expenditure. 4. In this case search and seizure operation was conducted on October 8, 2010 at the residential and business premises of M/s. Sood group of cases. The assessee was also covered. The Assessing Officer made the above addition in the assessment orders under section 153A read with section 143(3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is on the assessee to explain those entries. Since the assessee failed to explain the entries and failed to reconcile the expenses with the regular books of account, therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 25,72,821 under section 69C of the Act. 6. The assessee submitted before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that these entries are reflected in the books of account, therefore, addition is unjustified. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for filing the remand report. The Assessing Officer refuted the assessee's contention that these business expenses are duly reflected in the books of account. The assessee, however, explained that the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing was adjourned to March 15, 2013. The assessment order is passed on March 22, 2013. The Assessing Officer did not provide any sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the issue. When the issue was explained before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Assessing Officer did not deny the explanation of the assessee. The details furnished by the assessee were provided to the learned Departmental representative who sought time to verify whether all the documents filed in the paper book by the assessee are part of the record of the Assessing Officer/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). There is no rebuttal to the arguments of the learned counsel for the assessee. 9. The learned Departmental representative, however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im. The learned counsel for the assessee prepared a chart as per the contents of the seized documents and each entry is explained through entries in the day book journal voucher and ledger account of advances (land). It therefore, supports the explanation of the assessee that all the expenditure mentioned in the seized papers are duly reflected in the regular books of account of the assessee. The learned Departmental representative did not file any objection to the documents filed in the paper book were part of the record of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Therefore, the explanation of the assessee that all the expenditure mentioned in the seized papers are reconciled through regular books of account stands established and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
