TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court affirms tax additions, deletions, and dismisses appeal on fresh evidence without AO opportunity.</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income Tax -III Versus Dineshkumar Chandmal Jain</h3> The High Court upheld the decisions of the CIT(A) and ITAT in a tax matter involving various additions and accommodations. The court confirmed the ... - Issues Involved:1. Accommodation entries and income @ 0.25%.2. Addition u/s 40A(3) for cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000/-.3. Addition for office expenses.4. Addition for rent expenses.5. Addition for printing and stationery expenses.6. Addition for salary expenses.7. Acceptance of fresh evidence by CIT(A) without opportunity to A.O.Summary:1. Accommodation Entries and Income @ 0.25%:The ITAT held that it is an admitted fact that the assessee has only given accommodation entries to earn income @ 0.25%. The assessee admitted during the survey that he issued bills and received a commission of 0.25% on the amount of bills. The CIT(A) and ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to compute the income at 0.25% on the total turnover, which was confirmed by the High Court.2. Addition u/s 40A(3) for Cash Payments Exceeding Rs. 20,000/-:The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 3,52,44,338/- u/s 40A(3) for cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000/-. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, stating that the transactions were only paper entries and no actual cash payments were made. The ITAT confirmed this deletion, and the High Court upheld the ITAT's decision, agreeing that the payments were not actually made in cash.3. Addition for Office Expenses:The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 52,840/- for office expenses due to lack of supporting evidence. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the ITAT confirmed the deletion. The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision.4. Addition for Rent Expenses:The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 91,000/- for rent expenses due to lack of supporting evidence. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the ITAT confirmed the deletion. The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision.5. Addition for Printing and Stationery Expenses:The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 28,790/- for printing and stationery expenses due to lack of supporting evidence. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the ITAT confirmed the deletion. The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision.6. Addition for Salary Expenses:The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 4,05,500/- for salary expenses due to lack of supporting evidence. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, and the ITAT confirmed the deletion. The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision.7. Acceptance of Fresh Evidence by CIT(A) without Opportunity to A.O.:The revenue contended that the CIT(A) accepted fresh evidence without giving an opportunity to the Assessing Officer. The ITAT decided the case on merits without addressing this specific ground. The High Court found no substantial question of law in this regard and dismissed the appeals.Conclusion:The High Court dismissed the tax appeals, upholding the decisions of the CIT(A) and ITAT, and confirmed that no substantial question of law arises in the present tax appeals.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
