9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r making addition of Rs. 42,54,422/- in the returned income of Rs. 18,80,5741- filed by the appellant, without adjudicating the submissions of the appellant judicially and without giving adequate opportunity to him. 2. That the learned C.I.T(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal, without pursuing the facts brought on record by the appellant on merit. 3. That the learned C.I.T.(A) erred in upholding addition of Rs. 42,54,422/- on merit without understanding the facts as a prudent appellate Court, rather his conduct in passing appellate Order in haste without remand Report of the Assessing Officer is totally arbitrary, illegal. 4. That the learned C.I.T.(A) did not appreciate that the Form 26AS is not sacrosanct of its co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... & CIT (A) are not based on the facts of the case & as per law and hence additions sustained by the CIT (A) are totally illegal. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of the appeal. 4. The brief facts of the case are as under: 5. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 14/10/2010 declaring gross total income of Rs. 18,80,574/-. The return was processed under section 143 (1) of the Act and the case was selected for scrutiny. Accordingly notice under section 143 (2) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee's representative appeared before Ld. AO and submitted documents and information called for. Ld. AO observed that assessee is a recovery agent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was rejected by Ld. AO and an addition of Rs. 41,20, 632/- was made. Ld. AO He also disallowed 1/10th of telephone expenses on estimate basis amounting to Rs. 93,890 and Rs. 40,000 to staff welfare expenses. 8. Aggrieved by the addition made by the Ld. AO assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal filed. 9. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before us now. 10. Ld. AR submitted that form 26 A-S is a statement generated on the website of Income Tax Department on the basis of TDS return filed by the deduct or and not by the assessee. He further submitted that the amount appearing in 26 A-S is not conclusive in respect of income to be assessed, as it is merely a detail of TDS credit i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 321 ITR 677 (BOM) and 132 ITR 623 (KER). 14. We have perused arguments advanced before us by both the sides in the light of the records placed before us. 15. It is observed that assessee had filed a lot of details before the authorities which deserves to be verified in detail. However neither Ld. CIT(A) had called for remand report, nor did Ld. AO conduct any enquiry to verify the correct income of assessee. Under such circumstances it is difficult to accept the income as reflected in form 26 A-S. We are therefore inclined to set aside the issue back to the files of Ld. AO to verify all the details and to ascertain the right income of the assessee. It cannot be ignored that mistakes could creep into form 26 A-S, which needs to be corre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
