TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o a contract and also by admitting additional evidences in contravention to provisions of Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.2,50,000 on acocunt of difference in capital a/c by admitting additional evidences without remanding the matter back to the file of AO for verification in contravention to the provisions of Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting an addition of Rs.2,98,582 on account of unexplained cash credits by admitting loan confirmations from assessee without calling for remand report from AO in contravention to the provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts are pursuant to a contract between the appellant and these parties. The learned AR argued and submitted before me that no written or oral contract is made with these parties. Therefore, the provisions of section 194C are not attracted at all. Besides this, the labour charges of Rs.4,79,026 includes the major chunk of purchases also. Therefore, in the absence of clear finding of fact, it cannot be presumed that the payments to first five parties mentioned in the table in para 5.1 of the impugned assessment order are made in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and the appellant. Hence it is held that no TDS is required in the hands of the appellant while paying these amounts. Accordingly the impugned addition of Rs.5,79,026 is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... deleted the same stating as under: "5.3 I have gone through the impugned assessment order as well as arguments and submissions of the learned Counsel of the appellant. I find force in the arguments and submissions of learned Authorized Representative that there cannot be made any addition because only the balance was reflected in the firms capital a/c whereas in the proprietary capital account two separate entries shown. These copies were furnished by appellant during the course of assessment proceedings too. Hence I am of the considered opinion that the explanation furnished by the appellant is correct and the mistakes are bonafide and feasible one. Thus, the impugned addition is deleted in view of the facts and circumstances of the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he instant case. Since the amount stands explained as in Para 5.2 and 6.2 above, the impugned addition is deleted in view of the facts and circumstances of the instant case. (Relief: Rs.2,98,582)". Here also we do not see any reason to differ from the findings of the CIT (A) as the same amount was brought to tax by AO under different a/c. Since these facts were examined by the CIT (A), we reject the ground. 9. The last ground is with reference to the addition of Rs.50,000. Assessee has shown a loan of Rs.3.00 lakhs from one Mr.Sanjay Surana whereas the loan confirmation submitted by assessee was only for Rs.2,50,000. AO brought the difference of Rs.50,000 taxed as unexplained cash credit. It was explained that the unsecured loan was m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....were written back by assessee in the Profit & Loss A/c and that is how the Hon'ble Supreme Court held the same to be taxable whereas in the instant case, no such action has been taken by the appellant. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, the impugned liabilities can be treated to have been ceased within the meaning of section 4191) of the I.T. Act. Hence I find force in the arguments and submissions of the learned Counsel that no addition could have been made under section 4191) of the I.T. Act, 1961 in the case of the appellant. Accordingly, the same is deleted in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. (Relief: Rs.50,000)". 10. After considering the rival submissions, we uphold the order of the CIT (A). As rightly noticed by t....