9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 165X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the name and style of Homeo Cure. Assessee is stated to have filed the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 07.10.2018, claiming exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act vide order dated 04.02.2021 and the total income was determined at Rs.10,50,000/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). NFAC who vide order dated 03.12.2021 in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10006855 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds: 1. "That, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on the facts of the case by confirmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the aggregate salary paid as per Form 10B to the above three persons was Rs.24,05,000/- whereas amount that was reflected in Bank A/c was Rs.13,55,000/- resulting into a difference of Rs.10,50,000/-. AO though noted that the salary paid to the specified persons were considered to be reasonable but he disallowed the differential amount of Rs.10,50,000/- u/s 40A(2) of the Act, as according to him, assessee had failed to furnish the evidence of the payment of the differential amount. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) upheld the order of AO by noting the fact that assessee had failed to explain the difference in the salary of the three specified persons as per Profit and Loss account and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on 31.03.2017 was indeed paid in immediate succeeding year. He further submitted that the aforesaid documents could not be furnished before the AO and CIT(A) as no show-cause notice was issued in this regard. He therefore submitted that since the aforesaid documents goes to the root of the matter with respect to the allowability of the salary payable and in the interest of justice the same be admitted. 6. With respect to the other grounds raised, Learned AR submitted that assessee had raised Ground No.2 & 3 before the CIT(A) but the same have not been adjudicated by Learned CIT(A). He therefore fairly submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter be remanded back to the file of CIT(A). Learned AR further stated that assessee unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... afresh in accordance with law after considering the additional evidences filed by the assessee. Thus the Ground No.1 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. As far as Ground No.2 & 3 are concerned, I find that though the grounds were raised by the assessee before CIT(A), but the same have not been adjudicated by CIT(A). In such a situation, I restore the issue back to the file of CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the issues raised therein after considering the submissions of the assessee and in accordance with law. Needless to state that CIT(A) shall grant adequate opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Thus the grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
