TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1981 (3) TMI 155
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stimated the additional profit of Rs. 2,000. 2. The assessee came in appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) deleted the additional profit taken by the ITO at Rs.2,000 but he maintained the disallowance of loss of Rs.763 in garlic account. 3. The assessee disclosed the loss of Rs.763 in garlic account. The trading account in the Head Office had been accepted, the CIT(A) had deleted the additional profit of Rs.2,000 taken by the ITO in potato, onion etc. Under the above circumstances, there is no justification of disallowance of loss of Rs. 763 which is allowed. 4. The next objection of the assessee is about the maintenance of addition of Rs.2,000 in wheat account in M/s Gyandeo Pd. Pannalal. The assessee in M/s Gyandeo Pd. Pannalal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4,892. The ITO did not accept the same and he, after disallowing the loss, took the additional profit of Rs. 1,500. 8. The assessee came in appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) had deleted the additional profit taken by the ITO at Rs. 1,500 but he has confirmed the disallowance of loss of Rs. 4,892. 9. The assessee, no doubt, had indicated that the market was not favourable in Dec., 1974 and March, 1975, but, however it was not able to prove the loss of Rs. 4,892. Consequently, the disallowance of loss of Rs. 4,892 by the CIT(A) is fair and the same is confirmed. 10. The next objection of the assessee is about the disallowance of Rs. 1,000 out of shop expenses. The ITO disallowed Rs. 1,500 out of shop expenses on the ground tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in view of the fact that some relief had been allowed by the CIT(A) and further relief may be allowed by the Tribunal, it is necessary to discuss the addition of Rs. 15,000 in the name of Shri Gyandeo Prasad. He stated that Shri Gyandeo Prasad is an income-tax assessee. His file No. had been given before the ITO. The ITO had himself accepted not only the identity but also the capacity of Shri Gyandeo Prasad and he only determined Rs. 15,000 as unexplained investment. Under the above circumstances, there could not be any justification for addition of Rs. 15,000 in the hands of the assessee. Shri Prasad, the senior Deptl. Rep., on the other hand, supported the order of the ITO and urged that the ITO has considered the income of Shri Gyandeo P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the above circumstances, the deposit made by Shri Gyandeo Prasad with the assessee could not be taken as unexplained. Consequently, even if the additions in the trading account are deleted, no addition could be made for the amount deposited by Shri Gyandeo Prasad. 16. The last objection of the assessee is for the interest charged by the ITO under ss. 139 and 217 of the Act. The assessee pleaded that the ITO has not indicated any intention of his charging interest under ss. 139 and 217 in the assessment order. This fact is also not borne out from the order sheet of the ITO. However, the assessee received the demand notice in which the interest was included under ss. 139 and 217 of the Act. The assessee took a ground before the CIT(A), but....