TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in law and facts in allowing deduction on account of salary paid to partner by the firm u/s 184(5) and also ignoring non-compliance of all the terms of notices issued under section 143(2) and 142(1) and completion of assessment made in the manner laid down in section 144 of the I.T. Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that there had been survey in the case of the assessee on 23.09.2005 in which vouchers, bills, records and documents were impounded by the survey party. Notice under section 142(1) dated 05.07.2007 was served on the assessee on 11.07.2007 and fixed the case for 20.07.2007. The assessee did not produce the books of accounts and the reliant information. The A. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has vehemently challenged the same stating that in case of the appellant a survey u/s 133A was conducted in which the vouchers, bills, records and documents were impounded by the survey party. Further the appellant has admittedly filed before the Assessing Officer the details relating to different expenses, copies of which have also been filed forming part of the records. As regards low profits the appellant has already explained before the Assessing Officer vide letters supported by documents that the tenders were taken below 7.9% to 12.1% of the standard rate. The Assessing Officer has also quoted appellant s version at Pg.6 of the assessment order as per which the appellant has explained profit rate as follows : As regards the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d has furnished voluminous information in respect of the queries raised by the Assessing Officer from time to time. Hence the Assessing Officer was not justified in proceeding to assess the income u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act at 8%. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated above it would however be reasonable to confirm and addition of ₹ 1,00,000/- out of the addition made by the Assessing Officer so as to take care of inadmissible and a part expenditure claimed but not relating to the business of the appellant being of personal or non-business nature. The Assessing Officer is directed accordingly. 3. Similarly, the A.O. was directed to allow salary and interest to the assessee. 4. Before us, the ld. D.R. relied on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourse of survey carried out at the business place of the assessee. Thus, it was contended that the A.O. was not justified in making the assessment in the manner as specified under section 144 of the Act as the assessee has complied with all the provisions. Reliance was placed on the decision of the CIT(A). 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the orders of the Tax authorities below as well as the material submitted before us. The assessee had gross receipts during the year to the extent of ₹ 2,73,70,360/-. The assessee has submitted the income-tax return declaring an income of ₹ 3,80,212/-. The return was submitted along with the audit report. There had been survey in the case of the assessee and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
