TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 680X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .24,96,217/- after giving effect to the reversal entry of Rs.7,13,748/- as reflected in the Form 26AS. The income of the assessee firm would be at Rs.1,42,598/- if computed @ 8% of the contractual receipts on the presumptive basis. Hence, impugned addition as made by the AO and sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) is unjustified and deserves to be deleted. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA No.4801/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 31-8-2022 - SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by Shri Suresh Wadhwa, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-38, New Delhi dated 28.03.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the issue of difference between two amounts of contractual receipts i.e. (a) Amount of INR 24,96,217/- as per AIR Information in the possession of Ld. AO and (b) Amount of INR 17,82,469/- as per Form-26AS filed by the Appellant for the AY under consideration. 6. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in law while upholding the Order passed by Ld. AO, disallowing a TDS credit of INR 66,511/- to the appellant which is duly reflected in the Form-26AS for the AY under consideration. 7. The above grounds are without prejudice to each other. 8. The appellate craves the leave to add, amend or alter all or any of the grounds of appeal. FACTS OF THE CASE 3. Facts giving rise to the prese ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmissions of the assessee in a right perspective. He further stated that the notices issued by the AO were not served upon the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the written submissions. For the sake of clarity, written submissions of the assessee are reproduced as under:- [BRIEF SYNOPSIS/ ARGUMENTS ON THE BEHALF OF THE APPELANT: May it please Your Honour, 1. The issue involved in this case is with regarding the wrong, erred and unlawful additions of INR 8,09,697/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide assessment order passed on 07.12.2017 under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. The Appellant is a Partnership Firm as per it's basic co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration. 7. That the Ld. AO has grossly erred in law by treating the difference amount with AIR Information Report and Form26AS - as Contractual Receipts and applying thereon Section 44AD as well. Contractual Receipts as taken by Ld. AO from AIR Information INR 24,96,217/- and Contractual Receipts as per Form-26AS issued to the Appellant by the Income Tax Department INR 17,82,469/- for the AY under consideration. The AIR Information Report has been solely considered as the primary source by the Ld. AO without giving any regard to Form 26AS. 8. The difference between the AIR Information Report and Form 26AS is INR 7,13,748/-. While viewing the Form 26AS, it can be seen that there has been a reversal entry of similar amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zed representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. In respect of the impugned addition, the Ld. CIT(A) had admitted the additional evidences. However, Ld.CIT(A) sustained the impugned addition by observing as under:- 4.5. Ground of appeal No.6 and 8 - relate to the addition of Rs.8,09,697/-. The appellant filed an application dated 21.01.2019 under Rule 46A submitting additional evidence. The same was forwarded to the Assessing Officer but till the date of order, no reply has been received. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, the additional evidence filed by the appellant are being admitted. The evidences pertain to two additions: - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
