2012 (9) TMI 832

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tools and supplying labour to complete labour job sub-contracts. The return of income was filed declaring income at Rs. 10,12,644/- on 27-06-2006. However, the assessment was completed including disallowance of unsecured loan and labour charges etc. at an income of Rs. 73,72,979/-vide order dtd. 19-12-2008 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). On appeal the ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. 3. Being aggrieved with the order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Ground No. 1 is against the trading addition of Rs.19,02,980/-. 5. Brief facts of the above issue are that the A.O. noticed that a sum of Rs. 60,48,000/- was outstanding as labour charges payable. He further noticed that the same wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd accordingly he applied estimated profit at 8% of the turnover of Rs. 2,37,87,238/- and worked out the income from contract receipts Rs. 19,02,980/- as against the addition of Rs. 61,63,000/- (Rs. 60,48,000/- + Rs. 20,000/- + Rs. 75,000/- + Rs. 20,000/-) made by the A.O. 6. At the time of hearing the ld. counsel for the assessee while reiterating the same submissions as submitted before the A.O. and ld. CIT(A) further submits that the ld. CIT(A) without any basis was not justified in rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee and in applying the net profit rate of 8% on the contract receipts shown by the assessee. He, therefore, submits that the addition made by the A.O. and sustained by the ld. CIT(A) be deleted. 7. On the oth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e A.O. noted that the assessee has failed to prove the loan confirmation of Shri Mahesh Kumar and Archana Enterprises amounting to Rs. 1,61,000/- and Rs. 43,000/- respectively and hence he added Rs. 2,04,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) while observing that the loan of Archana Enterprises is an outstanding loan, deleted the addition of Rs. 43,000/- and in the absence of any confirmation letter from Mahesh Kumar, confirmed the addition of Rs. 1,61,000/-. 11. At the time of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee submits that now the assessee is able to receive confirmation letter of Mahesh Kumar along with his PAN appearing at page 1-2 of the assessee's paper book as additional evidence, therefore, in the interest of j....