2014 (6) TMI 801

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Shri Vikas Agarwal ORDER Per N. K. Billaiya, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-26, Mumbai dt.16.11.2012 pertaining to A.Y. 2007-08. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 12 lakhs being advance received before commencement of professional work. 3. The assessee is in the busine....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o receipt/bill for Rs. 12 lakhs has been produced. The AO was of the firm belief that no client will pay advance to the Advocate unless some work has been done by the Advocate. No correspondence from these parties was produced, the AO went on to treat Rs. 12 lakhs as receipt for the year under consideration. 5. Aggrieved by this, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A). It was str....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has correctly taxed these receipts as business receipts. 6. Aggrieved by this, the assessee is before us. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated that these 5 parties belonging to the same group approached the assessee in relation to some matter pending before the SEBI with respect to some IPO Scam. It was contended by the Ld. Counsel that since the matter before the SEBI was taken up....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t before us. It appears that the AO has not considered the chronological events of this case. The AO has simply added Rs. 12 lakhs on the belief that no client would give money to an Advocate unless some work is done by that Advocate. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition stating that the AO has doubted the genuineness of the evidence filed before him. In our considered view, this issue needs ....