9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts and circumstances of the case in law, The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming stand of Ld. A.O. on account of rejection of Books of accounts u/s 145(3). 2. The assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend the existing grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing. 03. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the profession of Hospital. It filed its return of income on 2/11/2017 at a total income of Rs. 1,43,61,970/-. 04. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out on 14/9/2017. During the course of survey, Registers, Bill books, loose papers, etc. were found from the premises. On perusal of the documents, the Learned Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has received gross income of Rs. 4.17 crores that included some repetitive bill entries and discounts to the parties. Therefore, Rs. 30 lakhs was reduced from the total gross receipts. Further, expenses were also verified and net profit was worked out at Rs. 1.62 crores. The assessee in question No.10 of the statement recorded during the course of survey also admitted this. However, on perusal of the return of income filed, the assessee declared a total income of Rs. 1,43,61,970/-. 05. During the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -. A perusal of the statement recorded during the survey clearly suggests that the gross receipts at that time were worked out at Rs. 4,17,00,000/-, which has not been disputed by the appellant till date. If we reduce the claim of the appellant amounting to Rs. 81,49,904/- from Rs. 4,17,00,000/-, the resulting figure comes to Rs. 3,35,50,096/-. Against this amount, the appellant has declared professional receipts of Rs. 3,34,85,430/- in the P/L Account. Therefore, till date the appellant has not reconciled the difference of Rs. 56,666-(3,35,50,0963,34,93,430). Since in the assessment proceedings, as well as in the appellate proceedings, the claim of the appellant is that the total amount of Rs. 81,49,904/- should be reduced from the gross receipts quantified at the time of survey, therefore, the difference of Rs. 56,666/- remained unexplained till date. 11. The appellant has further claimed that an amount of Rs. 7,62,730/- was included in the gross receipts but since this amount corresponds to professional fee paid by the appellant, same should be reduced from the gross receipts. In support of this, the appellant has claimed that complete details of this amount of Rs. 7,62,730/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted details of discount given to various patients. These details were verified by the undersigned on a test check basis and it is found that the claim of the appellant is not entirely correct as explained below: (i) A bill of Rs. 3,15,610/- was raised for the patient Shri Ramji Singh. As per the table furnished by the appellant, whole of this amount was given as discount. During the hearing, the appellant was requested to substantiate that whole of the bill amount was waived-off by the assessee by way of discount. In support to this, the appellant has filed a copy of provisional bill amounting to Rs. 3,15,610/- However, on this bill there is no mention of any discount. It is seen that the amount of discount/concession is mentioned on many other bills filed/produced by the appellant, however, there is no such narration on this bill. (ii) There is another amount of Rs. 70,515/- claimed by the appellant as discount in the name of M/s Pulse Imaging Pvt. Limited, however, no supporting document for this discount has been filed claiming that it was out of the opening balance. This submission of the appellant does not clarify as to how a discount can be claimed for some bill which w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted the professional trial balance and details of expenditure. In response to question No.5, he also submitted the payments made to the Doctors. Accordingly, he submitted that all these details are available during the course of assessment proceedings only. He further referred to the statement of the same person recorded on 14/9/2017, which is placed at pages 187 of the paper book and submitted that in response to question No.8, he referred to the fact that there are repetition of various bills and discounts have been given to various patients. At that time, the lump-sum amount of Rs. 30 lakhs was mentioned and therefore, from the addition made of Rs. 19 lakhs, the above sum should have been reduced. He also submitted that the profit derived of Rs. 1.61 crores in the statement is merely on approximation. Further the sum of Rs. 30 lakhs was also approximation. Therefore the addition is made against the disclosure which was made on approximation basis against the total income offered by the assessee. He submitted that in the details submitted before the learned lower authorities no defects are pointed out. It was further the claim of the assessee that the learned CIT - A has convinc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the paper book, the assessee has submitted the complete reconciliation of gross receipts shown as well as the professional fees paid along with duplicate bills. In the ledge account of professional fees paid, the assessee has debited a sum of Rs. 29,65,454/- which is reduced from the gross receipts. This sum includes discount of Rs 22,02,724/- and professional fees of Rs 762730/-. The Learned Assessing Officer and the Learned CIT-A has already granted reduction of Rs. 30 lakhs from the gross receipts on account of discount and repetitive bills , however as per books of accounts, duplicate bill entries are of Rs 51,79,936/- discount of Rs. 22,07,238/-. Therefore, the assessee has apparently been denied reduction of Rs. 7,62,730/- of professional fees. For professional fees assessee has given the names of doctors to whom it is paid which are recorded in the same ledger in which discounts are also mentioned. On a careful reading of the statement of the partner of the assessee in question No.10, Rs. 1.62 crores was also an approximation of net result of gross receipts and estimated expenses were stated to be Rs 2.25 crores. Further, in response to question No.8, repetitive bills and d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
