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>Tax Appeal Partially Allowed with Directions for Reclassification & Verification. Emphasis on Natural Justice Principles.</h1> <h3>Ashish Dwivedi Versus I.T.O., Range – 1 (1), Allahabad</h3> Ashish Dwivedi Versus I.T.O., Range – 1 (1), Allahabad - TMI Issues Involved:1. Opportunity of being heard and natural justice.2. Addition of Rs. 49,670 under Section 69.3. Addition of Rs. 5,30,120 under Section 69.4. Addition of Rs. 1,41,800 under Section 69.5. Disallowance of deduction under Section 80TTA.Detailed Analysis:1. Opportunity of Being Heard and Natural Justice:The assessee contended that the appellate authority did not provide a proper opportunity of being heard and that the order was against natural justice and arbitrary. These grounds were considered general and did not require specific adjudication. However, they were taken into account while deciding the merits of other issues.2. Addition of Rs. 49,670 under Section 69:The Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 49,670 as business income from the assessee's proprietorship concern, M/s Ashu Marketing, by estimating net profit at 8% on gross sales. The AO rejected the assessee's profit and loss account, which declared a loss of Rs. 495.07, and instead estimated income under Section 44AF. The AO's action of reclassifying this as income under Section 69 was challenged. The Tribunal found that the AO's reclassification was unjustified since the business activity and transactions were accepted. Therefore, the addition was directed to be treated as business income, partially allowing the assessee's ground.3. Addition of Rs. 5,30,120 under Section 69:The AO added Rs. 5,30,120 as unexplained investment in immovable property. The assessee explained the source as a withdrawal of Rs. 6,00,000 from an Axis Bank account, funded by a Rs. 9,00,000 withdrawal from a partnership firm, M/s Soft Solutions. The Tribunal found that the assessee adequately explained the source of investment with contemporaneous transactions in the bank account. Consequently, the addition was deleted.4. Addition of Rs. 1,41,800 under Section 69:The AO added Rs. 1,41,800 as unexplained deposits in the assessee's and his daughter's savings accounts. The assessee explained these deposits as transfers from other bank accounts and opening cash balance. The Tribunal noted that these explanations and evidence were not presented before the AO. Therefore, the issue was remanded to the AO for verification, with instructions to provide the assessee an opportunity to present evidence.5. Disallowance of Deduction under Section 80TTA:The AO added Rs. 3,097 as interest income under 'income from other sources.' The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80TTA, which the CIT(A) directed the AO to allow if the conditions were met. The Tribunal found no grievance against the CIT(A)'s order, directing the AO to consider and allow the deduction if eligible.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed, with specific directions for reclassification and verification of certain additions and deductions. The Tribunal emphasized the need for proper verification and adherence to natural justice principles.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
