ITAT affirms Assessing Officer's undisclosed income additions; highlights importance of substantiating claims

Smt. Pragyan Mohanty Versus ITO, Ward 1 (2), Bhubaneswar

Smt. Pragyan Mohanty Versus ITO, Ward 1 (2), Bhubaneswar - TMI Issues:
1. Addition of Rs. 2,56,805 as undisclosed income.
2. Addition of Rs. 2,34,256 as unexplained money.
3. Alleged undisclosed liability of Rs. 733.
4. Addition of Rs. 2,07,150 as undisclosed receivables.

Issue 1: Addition of Rs. 2,56,805 as undisclosed income
The Assessing Officer found discrepancies in the bank accounts of the assessee, leading to the addition of Rs. 2,56,805 to the income. The CIT(A) upheld this addition as no evidence was presented to challenge it. The appellant failed to provide any material to counter the findings, resulting in the confirmation of the addition by the ITAT.

Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 2,34,256 as unexplained money
The Assessing Officer identified an excess payment of license fees, adding Rs. 2,34,256 to the income. The appellant argued that this amount should not be treated as unexplained money due to consistent accounting practices. However, the CIT(A) and ITAT confirmed the addition, emphasizing the lack of evidence to justify the discrepancy and the prepaid nature of the expenditure.

Issue 3: Alleged undisclosed liability of Rs. 733
The appellant did not pursue this ground during the hearing, leading to its dismissal for lack of prosecution. No further analysis or discussion was provided regarding this issue in the judgment.

Issue 4: Addition of Rs. 2,07,150 as undisclosed receivables
The Assessing Officer noted uncredited contract receipts of Rs. 2,07,105 in the bank account, which were not reflected in the balance sheet. Consequently, Rs. 2,07,150 was added to the income. The CIT(A) and ITAT upheld this addition as the appellant failed to offer any explanation or evidence to refute the findings, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, upholding the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding undisclosed income, unexplained money, and undisclosed receivables. The judgment highlights the importance of providing substantial evidence and explanations to challenge such additions during the assessment process.