TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 1089
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e @ Rs. 10,000/- per acre and allowed the appeal of the assessee deleting the addition of Rs. 14,20,000/- and rest of the amount of Rs. 7,05,607/- was confirmed. The Revenue is now challenging deletion of addition of Rs. 14,20,000/- and assessee in the C.O. challenged the part addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) in a sum of Rs. 7,05,607/-. Ld. Representative of both the parties submitted that the issue is identical as have been argued by them in Cross Objection No. 26 & 27/Chd/2015 for Assessment year 2009-10 & 2010-11. It is therefore submitted that the order in this C.O. may be followed in the present matter. 5. On consideration of the fact of the case and submissions of the parties we find that the issue is same as have been considered in preceding Assessment year 2009-10 and 2010-11 in C.O. No 26 & 27/Chd/2015, in which vide order dt. 10/03/2016, we have accepted the earning of agricultural income @ Rs. 15,000/- per acre and accepted the claim of assessee in a sum of Rs. 21,30,000/-. In the Assessment year under appeal, the AO has mentioned that assessee has declared agricultural income of Rs. 21,30,000/- but in the computation it was shown at Rs. 21,25,607/-. Therefore follo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of finances. The assessee has to rely on the staff and employees therefore comparison from the earlier year was factually wrong. The license fee has also increased as compare to the last year and additional license fee was also charged which were the factor for low gross profit. There is increase in the expenditure as compare to earlier year. All the transactions are carried out through the Excise Department therefore, without any evidence of suppression of sale, the addition was wholly unjustified. It was also submitted that assessee has surrendered income of Rs. 2.25 Crores which has been duly reflected in the profit and loss account and even if there was any discrepancy the same would stand covered by the income surrendered. The submissions of the assessee were forwarded to the AO for his comments in which the AO reiterated the facts stated in the assessment order. 8. Ld. CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and materials on record, found that the assessee maintained books of account which have been audited and no defect in the same have been pointed out by the AO. No evidence either of inflation of purchase or suppression of sales were found. There is no eviden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was submitted that additional license fee has been imposed by the Excise and Taxation Department, Government of Punjab on every purchase made under the "Atta Daal Scheme" introduced in the Assessment year under appeal. It was wrong to say that additional fee is charged on account of non or late payment of license fee. It has to be paid for every purchase as the purchase permit is issued on payment of additional license fee. Since expenses was made during the course of the business therefore it should not be disallowed. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) considering explanation of the assessee and material on record found that additional license fee is not in the nature of penalty and there was no opportunity given by the AO to explain this issue. The assessee produce sufficient material on record to prove that additional license fee has been imposed by the Excise and Taxation Department, Government of Punjab on every purchase under "Atta Daal Scheme" therefore addition was found to be unjustified and deleted. 13. After considering the rival submission we do not find any merits in this ground of appeal of the Revenue. The assessee referred to Paper Book page no. 29 and 30 which is the certifica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ward balances. The AO has not established that the amount borrowed on interest has been advanced as interest free in the year under assessment. No addition can be made when the advances were opening brought forward balance from the last year. The assessee relied upon several decisions in support of its contention. The rest of advances also do not have any direct nexus with interest bearing loans. The Revenue has nowhere established that the loan has been given only for personal purpose. However the loan has been given on account of commercial expediency. AO has wrongly disallowed the amount of interest. There were huge amount of credit balance in the account of unsecured loans i.e; Rs. 36,99,500/- and creditors Rs. 5,95,89,498/-etc. to whom no interest has been paid by the assessee. Furthermore there is a credit of Rs. 4.36 crores in the capital account of the assessee therefore view favouring to the assessee should be adopted. Complete details were filed before the Ld. CIT(A). If the assessee would have paid interest to the parties and would have charged the interest, payable would have been much more than the interest receivable. The assessee relied upon several decisions in supp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... accordingly dismissed. 20. On Ground No. (e), the Revenue challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- on account of excessive freight charges. The AO compared the freight charges with the preceding Assessment year and found that disproportionate increase in the expenditure and accordingly made the addition. 21. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that the liquor was purchased from Wholesale Licensees, Distilleries with their depots / dumps which are situated at far and near places from the place of business. Assessee has given reasons for increase in the expenditure due to increase in the purchases therefore, addition was wholly unjustified which have been correctly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 22. On Ground No. (f), the Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition of Rs. 6,91,700/-, on account of unexplained cash found during the search. 23. The AO made the above addition because assessee could not explain the cash found at his residence at the time of search operation. 24. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that Smt. Nirmal Malhotra, mother of assessee had carried on her proprietorsh....