TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ten partnership firms are the assessee's benami firms. Therefore, We are of the view that the Learned Revenue Authorities had rightly treated all the relevant firms as the assessee's benami firms. As these firms have also not maintained their books of accounts properly and produced cogent evidence for the expense incurred before the Ld. Revenue Authorities. Under these circumstances, the Learned Revenue Authorities has estimated 5% of the aggregate turnover of all the relevant firms as the income of the assessee which We are of the view is quite reasonable and fair. Therefore, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the order of the Learned Revenue Authorities on this issue. Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) - Interest paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. A.O., who had estimated 5% of the aggregate turnover of the assessee's benami firms which worked out to ₹ 2,52,98,399/- and assessed the same in the hands of the assessee. (iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Ld. A.O. who had disallowed the amount of ₹ 17,41,978/- and ₹ 84,66,183/- being the interest paid on loan by the assessee without deducting tax at source invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of retail liquor trade, filed his return of income on 5/4/2014 for the A.Y. 2013-14 declaring total income of ₹ 2,69,26,280/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of all the benami firms @ 5% of their aggregate turnover which worked out to ₹ 2,52,98,399/- and added to the income of the assessee. Even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not establish that the firms in which the assessee was a partner is not his benami firms and also failed to furnish proper books of accounts. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Ld. A.O. on the issue. 6. Before us, the Ld. AR vehemently argued stating that all the assessee's firms are independent firms, hence those firms cannot be treated as assessee's benami firms. It was therefore argued that the income of the other firms cannot be added in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that in case if the income of the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the order of the Learned Revenue Authorities on this issue. Accordingly, Grounds No. 1 and 2 raised by the assessee is decided against the assessee. However, We also make it clear that since the income of all these firms are assessed in the hands of the assessee the same income cannot be once again assessed separately in the hands of those firms. It is ordered accordingly. 8. Ground No. 3 and 4: Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act: 9. The Ld. A.O. has disallowed the amount of ₹ 17,41,978/- and ₹ 84,66,183/- being the interest paid by the assessee to various entities without deducting TDS invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Even at this stage, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
