TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1101X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritten submission ) Respondent by: Sh. Manpreet Singh Duggal , Sr , DR ORDER Per Kul Bharat , JM The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.02.2018, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Jalandhar (Camp office at Srinagar), pertaining to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On circumstances and facts of the case, the worthy CIT(A) has erred in sustaining a part of the addition to the extent of Rs. 2,50,000/- out of Rs. 3,62,607/- made by Ld. ITO on the ground of non-availability of vouchers etc. in support of expenses claimed in books of account. 2. The worthy CIT(A) has erred in partly upholding the action of Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved, against this the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who after opposed the submissions partly allowed the appeal thereby he sustained the addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- out of disallowance of Rs. 3,62,607/-. 5. Aggrieved, against this the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee, however written arguments have been placed on record. 6. For the sake of clarity, the written arguments filed by the assessee are reproduced as under: This is an appeal against the order of the worthy CIT(A), Jammu dated 28-02-2018 for Asstt. Year 2013-14 THE FACTS OF THE CASE: The appellant assessee is a running a business of electric motors a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 06-02-2016(on page 2 para 2.1) that the assessee has also produced all documents regarding TDS like TDS quarterly returns, form 26AS, counterfoil of payment challans etc before him which were examined in detail found in order. However, to the dismay of appellant assessee, the worthy CIT(A), ignored this request of considering this fact to the detriment of appellant assessee proceeded ahead to sustain the addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- Your honor,- An injustice has been done to appellant assessee in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- on mere lumpsum basis which is neither backed by any details or logic but only surmise conjectures seemingly without going the assessment. Even for argument sake, if sum-total of fre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... presentative opposed the submission and supported the orders of the authorities below are well. 8. I have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. I find that the Assessing Officer has purely made addition by making ad-hoc disallowance out of the expenditure @ of 10%. The Assessing Officer has not been specified at what vouchers were not available and what was the amount of such vouchers, therefore, the finding of the Assessing Officer is purely ad-hoc and based on conjectures and surmises. Such findings of the Assessing Officer cannot be sustained. Hence, the Assessing Officer is hereby directed to delete the disallowance. The grounds raised in this appeal are allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
