TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 809
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of Income. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1 above, and to save otherwise the appellant further wants to give the following Grounds of Appeal also:- 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeal) was not justified not to hold a valid ground of dispute for disallowance of Rs. 1,33,376/-, as 1/6 of total expenditure Rs. 6,66,880/- merely on assumptions of Ld. A.O., the appellant has already declared net profit @ 28.429%, which is already reasonable in the profession of doctor. The appellant himself has never agreed to it, the disallowance is also highly pitched as well as arithmetically incorrect (1/6 of 6,66,880/- comes to an amount of Rs. 1,11,147/-). 3. The Ld. CIT (Appeal) was not justified to confirm the addition of Rs. 5,14,548/- (Rs. 2,27,000/- and 2,87,548/-) in two Bank Accounts made by the Ld. A.O. merely stating that the explanation is not satisfactory, the Ld. A.O. has made the additions without properly appreciating the sources, explanations and evidences furnished before him. The additions are improper, illegal, unjustified and are liable to be deleted. 4. The Ld. CIT (Appeal) was not justified to confirm the addition of Rs. 8,90,090/- in the Savings Bank Account with Standard C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore, according to him, the claim of expenses was not verified. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee himself had offered 1/6th of the expenses claimed for disallowances, which was worked out by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 1,33,376/-. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also observed that the assessee has not maintained any bills/vouchers in support of the expenses claimed and accordingly confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer in disallowing 1/6th of the expenses. 4.1 Before us, the learned Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that books of accounts, bills and vouchers were examined and test checked by the Assessing Officer as appearing from the first para of the assessment order, and, therefore, the claim of the Assessing Officer that assessee has not maintained bills/vouchers in support of the expenses, is not correct. He further submitted that the assessee did not sign or submitted any offer letter for disallowance of 1/6th of the expenses. He also submitted that amount of 1/6th disallowance has also not been computed correctly by the Assessing Officer as this amount should have been to Rs. 1,11,146/-. He further submit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the expenses claimed. In view of above facts, the claim of the assessee that books of account in respect of expenses claimed against professional receipt were produced before the Assessing Officer is not tenable. We have observed that the assessee is a medical doctor and engaged in the providing consultancy etc. and he had not been able to produce bills and vouchers in respect of the claim of expenses of Rs. 6,66,880/- against the professional receipts of Rs. 9,31,780/- and in those circumstances the estimate of disallowance of 1/6th of the expenses by the Assessing Officer is reasonable irrespective of the fact whether the same was accepted by the assessee or not. However, we agree with the contention of the learned Authorized Representative that 1/6th disallowance of the Rs. 6,66,880/- works out to Rs. 1,11,147/- and, therefore, the disallowance should be restricted to amount of Rs. 1,11,147/-. 4.4 We may like to mention here that the legislature has introduced Section 44ADA in the Act for computing profit and gains of professional on presumptive basis w.e.f. 01/04/2007, wherein if professional receipts are not exceeding Rs. 50 Lacs, the 50% of the professional receipt has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nished by the assessee was not found to be satisfactory by the Assessing Officer in absence of any documentary evidence and accordingly he made addition for the amount of Rs. 5,14,548/-. Before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also the assessee did not file any explanation or documentary evidence and therefore he sustained the addition. 5.1 Before us, the learned Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the deposits in the two bank accounts were received from tenants towards reimbursement for mess expenses i.e. cost of the food prepared in a common kitchen and provided to the tenants no profit no loss basis and the assessee had deposited the aforesaid sum in the bank after collection from tenants and has withdrawn and spent on fooding and other expenses of tenants during the year from time to time and the closing balance of the accounts on 31/03/2009 was Rs. 24.71 and Rs. 1 463.76 aggregating to Rs. 1,488.47 only. The Ld. authorised representative referred to the bank statements available at pages 35 and 37 of the paper book. 5.2 On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative submitted that no explanation in respect of the deposi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e amount as unexplained deposit. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also observed that the assessee failed to furnish any explanation in respect of the unexplained deposits of Rs. 8,90,090/- and upheld the same. 6.1 Before us, the learned Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that cash deposit of Rs. 8,90,090/- with the Standard Chartered Bank was consisting of Rs. 2,75,500/- as security deposit for two months from tenants and Rs. 5,98,452/were reimbursement of expenses like electricity, water bills, cleaning and maintenance, security service charge and security deposit etc. The learned Authorized Representative submitted that this explanation was submitted before the Assessing Officer vide submission dated 28/12/2011, (a copy of which has been filed at page 50 of the paper book of the assessee), however, same was not considered by the Assessing Officer. 6.2 On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee did not file any explanation, even before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and, therefore, these explanations of the assessee cannot be accepted. 6.3 We have heard the rival submission and....