TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal reads as under:- "That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs.22,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of expenses." 3. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and perused relevant material placed before us. We find that the assessee declared the income of Rs.46,00,041/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.22 lakhs out of total expenses on adhoc basis. Learned CIT(A) deleted the disallowance with the following finding:- "5.3 The submissions of the AR are considered. It is seen from the impugned order that the assessment proceedings began from the AO's end only from September 2009 and the appellant began to comply only....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the arguments of both the sides, we do not find any infirmity in the above finding of learned CIT(A). The CIT(A) has considered all the facts in detail. She has also recorded that the Assessing Officer has not pointed out any defect or expressed even doubt with regard to any particular expenses. The disallowance has been made purely on adhoc basis. Under the circumstances, the adhoc disallowance was found to be without basis and was accordingly deleted by the learned CIT(A). We do not find any justification to interfere with the order of learned CIT(A). The same is sustained and the Revenue's appeal is dismissed. Assessee's Cross Objection No.190/Del/2013 - AY 2005-06 :- 5. In the cross-objection, the assessee has raised the following gro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Revenue in its appeal for AY 2005-06. In this year also, adhoc disallowance was made without any basis and learned CIT(A), with identical observations, deleted the disallowance. Since we have already considered the identical issue in assessee's own case for AY 2005-06, for the detailed discussion in paragraph Nos.3 & 4 above, we uphold the order of learned CIT(A) and dismiss the Revenue's appeal. ITA No.1602/Del/2013 - Assessee's appeal for AY 2006-07 :- 9. In this appeal by the assessee, following grounds have been raised:- "1. That under the facts and circumstances and in view of the fact that no proceedings were pending and the Asstt. did not abate, therefore, in Asstt. u/s 153A, additions can be made only on the basis of incriminati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmanent account numbers were given. That the Assessing Officer did not consider the fresh confirmations which contained PAN and made the addition of Rs.6,30,000/-. He further submitted that in fact these credits were not the new credits and, therefore, Section 68 would not be applicable. He pointed out that on 15.11.2005, the assessee took over the partnership firm, viz., M/s BLK Furnishers and Contractors (firm). That these credits were lying in the books of the firm, viz., M/s BLK Furnishers and Contractors. That even in the books of the firm, the credit was not during the accounting year relevant to AY 2006-07 but was brought forward from earlier years. He, therefore, submitted that in no circumstances, the addition for unexplained credi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- 13. The only ground raised by the Revenue in this appeal reads as under:- "That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs.12,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of expenses." 14. At the time of hearing before us, both the sides fairly admitted that this ground is identical to the ground raised by the Revenue in its appeal for AY 2006-07. In this year also, adhoc disallowance was made without any basis and learned CIT(A), with identical observations, deleted the disallowance. Since we have already considered the identical issue in assessee's own case for AY 2006-07 as above, we uphold the order of learned CIT(A) and dismiss the Revenue's ap....