9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals)-9, Pune on 17.06.2019 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The first issue raised in the appeal is against confirmation of addition of Rs. 2,69,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a civil contractor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 69,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from the AO who harped on Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') for making out a case for the rejection of the additional evidence. Without prejudice, the AO also referred the matter to the concerned AO of the proprietor of M/s. Yashoda Construction. The other AO endorsed the view that the return was file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted in his Balance Sheet. Once the creditor had admitted the transaction and also incorporated the same in his accounts, there remained nothing more to prove the genuineness of the transaction, more so, when the AO of the creditor also did not raise any doubt over it. Considering the above facts, I order to delete the addition. 5. The only other ground is against confirmation of ad hoc disallowa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - during the course of assessment proceedings by considering the magnitude of total expenses vis-à-vis expenses not properly supported by vouchers. This being a factual admission by the assessee, cannot be raked up in the appellate proceedings. Though, there is no legal bar on challenging an agreed addition, but the fact of the matter is that a valid challenge can be laid before the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
