Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (12) TMI 1864

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n facts, we do not find this to be a fit case for the additions u/s 68. Disallowance of 5% of the expenses claimed in trading account - CIT(A) deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- It is true that the assessee did not file all the details of expenditure during the course of assessment proceedings. It is equally true that all the necessary details were furnished before the CIT(A) who had called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer. Once the details have been furnished and transmitted to the AO, and the same were examined by the CIT(A), we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). Appeal of revenue dismissed. - SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER For .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4. Proceeding further, the Assessing Officer further noticed that there were new unsecured loan of Rs. 17,07,145/-. The Assessing Officer treated the entire amount as unexplained cash credit and made addition under section 68 of the Act. 5. The assessee assailed the assessment before the CIT(A) and explained that its books of account are audited and it is incorrect to say that the assessee never complied with the requirement of the Assessing Officer. The assessee furnished all the details before the CIT(A). A remand report was called for from the Assessing Officer and counter reply was called for from the assessee. After considering the facts and submissions and the details submitted by the assessee, the CIT(A) observed that the adhoc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd no.1 is accordingly dismissed. 9. We find that the additions were made in respect of the following cash creditors:- S.No. Name, Address P.A. No. (if available) Amount taken or accepted Whether Squared up or not Maximum of amount outstanding Amount repayment (1) Arvindbhai Kantidas Parmar Address: N.A., Pan No.:N.A. 300,000 Yes 348,000 648,000 (2) Chaturbhai M. Raval: Address: N.A., PAN No.:N.A. Nil No 30,497/- Nil .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 231,588 Nil (12) Falguniben Parmar Address: N.A., PAN No.:N.A. Nil No 200,000 Nil (13) Ramaben A. Vaghela Address: N.A., PAN No.:N.A. Nil No 1,965,524 758,004 (14) Pratinj Nagarpalika Work Address: N.A., PAN No.:N.A. 185,000 No 185,000 Nil 10. We have also carefully gone through the copy of ledger account of all the aforementioned creditors. We find that inadvertently the tax auditor has treated the aforementio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates