9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceived from Free Trade Union Multipurpose Trust(FTUMPT), without giving any decision in the case of Ms. Chandbibi Zaidi wherein substantive addition was made by the Assessing Officer." 2. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITfA) erred in deleting addition of Rs. 38,50,000/- made on protective basis on account of amounts received from Free Trade Union Multipurpose Trust(FTUMPT), without indicating year-wise breakup and basis for his estimation that the alleged expenditure on the repairs would not be more Than Rs. 25 lakhs. 3. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITfA) was justified in deleting addition of Rs. 38,50,000/~ made on protective basis on account of amounts received from Free Trade Union Multipurpose Trust(FTUMPT), by having regard to the additional fact that appellant was assessed to tax u/s 44AD of the Act?" 3. The assessee has raised more or less common grounds of appeal for all years. For the sake of brevity, grounds of appeal taken for AY 2006-07 in ITA No.3974/Mum/2013 are reproduced below:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A)-38 err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Kennedy House building owned by Engineering Mazdoor Sabha was claimed as a deduction by Free Trade Unions Multi Purpose Trust on the ground that the alleged repair work to the building was not carried out and the money has been siphoned off by the managing trustee Ms.Chandbibi Zaidi. Consequent to search, assessee's case was taken up for assessment and accordingly notice u/s 153A was issued. In response to notices, the assessee has filed his return of income on 14-07-2010. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. In response to notices, assessee has filed various details, as called for. The assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Incometax Act, 1961 for AYs 2004-05 to 2010-11 on 29-12-2011, wherein the AO has made addition towards amount received from Free Trade Unions Multi Purpose Trust for AYs 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07 amounting to R.38,50,000, Rs. 24,50,000 and Rs. 18 lakhs towards repair work carried out at ground floor of Kennedy House on protective basis as a similar addition has been made in the hands of Ms.Chandbibi Zaidi on substantive basis on the allegation that no repair work was carried out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evidence; however, confirmed remaining amount on the ground that the assessee has not explained sources of cash deposit found in bank account with cogent evidences. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee as well as the revenue are in appeals before us. 6. The first issue that came up for our consideration from revenue's appeal for AYs 2004-05 to 2006-07 is protective addition made by the AO towards amount received from Free Trade Unions Multi Purpose Trust. The Lde.AR for the assessee at the time of hearing submitted that the issue is more or less covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench "C" in the case of Ms.Chandbibi Zaidi where the ITAT has deleted substantive addition made by the AO towards amount received from Free Trade Unions Multi Purpose Trust on the allegation that the managing trustee has siphoned off the funds of the trust under the guise of bogus expenditure incurred on repairs to Kennedy House Bldg, therefore, protective addition made in the hands of the assessee cannot survive when substantive addition has already been deleted in the hands of alleged beneficiary. The Ld.AR further submitted that the ITAT, in yet another case, in Fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld.AR for the assessee filed further evidence in the form of orders of ITAT in the case of Ms.Chandbibi Zaidi, where substantive addition made by the AO towards amount received from Free Trade Unions Multi Purpose Trust has been deleted. We, therefore, are of the opinion that once substantive addition made in the case of alleged beneficiary has been deleted by the ITAT, there is no reason to sustain addition made by the AO towards protective addition in the hands of the assessee more particularly, when assessee has demonstrated with evidence that such receipt has been part of his income-tax returns and also he has carried out necessary repair works to the trust. The Ld.CIT(A), after considering relevant facts has rightly deleted addition made by the AO. We do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, we are inclined to uphold the findings of Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss appeal filed by the revenue for AYs 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07. 9. The next issue that came up for our consideration from assessee's appeals for AYs 2006-07 to 2010-11 is addition made towards unexplained cash deposits found in two bank accounts u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time of assessment proceedings to explain credits found in savings bank account maintained in maintained Bharat co-operative Bank Ltd, Kalina Branch and ICICI Bank, Vile Parle (E) Branch. The assessee has made a generalized explanation in the light of its income-tax returns to argue that credits found in bank accounts are explained out of withdrawals from his two proprietory concerns, M/s Mahalaxmi Enterprises and M/s Sai Decors without any explanation with regard to each and every credit found in the bank account. But, now the assessee has filed a paper book which contains bank accounts maintained in the name of M/s Mahalaxmi Enterprises and M/s Sai Decors to match credits found in two savings bank account to corresponding withdrawals from two proprietory concerns, M/s Mahalaxmi Enterprises and M/s Sai Decors. The assessee also filed certain other evidences in the form of I.T. returns of his HUF to argue that he has received loans from HUF's bank account. The assessee also filed certain evidences to explain sources for credits found in bank account. The AO has erroneously made additions towards deposits found in bank accounts maintained in the name of Naresh Kadam. We find that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
