TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 833X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not bring on record any submissions or materials/evidences to show that the additional evidences which the assessee now wants to file were already on record before the Department. The Income Tax Act, being a welfare legislation, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee and that the ld. CIT(A) may consider the additional evidences which the assessee wants to file in support of his claim u/s. 68 of the Act and to represent his case on merits - Ground allowed for statistical purposes. Disallowance of site expenses, labour expenses and travelling conveyance expenses - AO had resorted to disallow 20% of these expenses and added the same to the income of assessee - CIT(A) upheld the addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioning that assessee failed to offer any logical/credible explanation about nature of said transaction, in spite of true explanation offered by assessee including true nature and source of transaction and also source of source credit received by account paying cheques credited in bank. 3. CIT-A, also erred in rejecting explanation offered by assessee, by simply stating that same is not satisfactory in his opinion without assigning proper reasons and justification in his order, including that of cash credit is bogus in any manner. 4. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the non consideration of the decisions quoted (2015) 64 taxmann.com 329 (Delhi) HIGH COURT OF DELHI in the matter - Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shiv Dhooti Pearls ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent from the order of ld. CIT(A), before him the assessee had submitted certain details/evidences i.e. name and addresses of creditors, copy of ITRs, balance sheet, ledger accounts, etc. That, at the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted before us that there are additional evidences which they wish to bring on record and prayed for admission of the same before us. His submission was that these evidences are relevant in determining whether the additions made u/s. 68 of the Act is warranted or not and they wanted to place them before the ld. CIT(A). However, sufficient opportunity was not provided to them by the First Appellate Authority. We further notice at para 5.3 of ld. CIT(A)'s order, he has formed opinion only with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ish verifiable vouchers in respect of allowability of the expenses. The assessee maintained a plea before the AO that it was not possible to maintain verifiable vouchers in respect of petty expenses and thereafter, the AO had resorted to disallow 20% of these expenses and added the same to the income of assessee. That, before the ld. CIT(A) it was contended by the assessee that the AO disallowed 20% of such expenses on ad hoc basis only without bringing any material on record or pointing any specific defect in the accounts of assessee. The ld. CIT(A) in his order at para 6.2 observed that before him also the assessee could not furnish various required details/evidences. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the AO as being reasonable a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
