TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 307
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee in its appeal is against confirmation of addition of Rs. 49,79,000/- made by the AO u/s 69C of the Act. Briefly stated, the facts of the ground are that the AO got AIR information relating to certain bank deposits made by the assessee totaling Rs. 49,79,000/-. The assessee was called upon to furnish source of these transactions. In the absence of any information forthcoming from the side of the assessee, as recorded in the assessment order, the AO made addition for this amount by applying the provisions of section 69C. In reaching this conclusion, he relied on the view taken by him for the AY 2006-07, in which year also addition u/s 69C was made, but without recourse to any AIR information. The ld. CIT(A) echoed the assessment orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en no reason for making addition u/s 69C of the Act. At this juncture, it is relevant to note the mandate of section 69C which provides that: "Where in any financial year an assessee has incurred any expenditure and he offers no explanation about the source of such expenditure or part thereof, or the explanation, if any, offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the amount covered by such expenditure or part thereof, as the case may be, may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year." A bare perusal of this provision indicates that the addition u/s 69C is contemplated only when the assessee has incurred some expenditure and there is no explanation about the source of such expenditu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee's appeal about the levy of interest u/s 234B is consequential and, accordingly, disposed of. 5. The Revenue is aggrieved against the deletion of addition of Rs. 1,67,62,500/- which was made by the AO. 6. The facts apropos this issue are that the assessee obtained a contract for job work relating to installation, commissioning and testing of wagon, shunting winches and ancillary works for Kakinada Sea Port Ltd. During the year, the assessee received five payments totaling to Rs. 1,25,71,875/-, which amount was directly taken to the Balance sheet without routing through the Profit & Loss Account. The AO observed that the value of the entire contract was Rs. 1,67,62,500/-. On being called upon to explain as to why the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the ld. CIT(A). The assessee in its cross objection is aggrieved against the sustenance of addition at Rs. 98,514/- for the instant year. 7. Having heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record, it is observed as undisputed fact that the total receipts during the year from this contract amounted to Rs. 1.25 crore. The value of the contract was Rs. 1.67 crore. The assessee not only took receipts of Rs. 1.25 crore to its balance sheet direct, but also simultaneously capitalized expenses incurred on this project at Rs. 1.00 crore during the year and took such expenditure also for consideration in the succeeding year. The case of the assessee is that it was following project completion method and the entire income w....