TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (6) TMI 907
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- confirmed by Ld.CIT(A). 4. The assessee has shown receipts of Rs. 3,75,265/- from Tanker running and claimed expenses of Rs. 4,60,481/- and thus claimed loss of Rs. 85,217/-. A.O. asked the assessee to produce vouchers but vouchers were not produced except few bills of diseal. The A.O. rejected the loss and made addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- under the head tanker running. 5. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee submitted as under :- "The A.O. has disallowed Rs. 1,50,000/- out of expenses of Rs. 4,60,481/- shown by the assessee regarding tanker. The disallowance has been without any basis. The appellant has produced the vouchers for measure expenses regarding diesel and particulars regarding wage....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng copies of vouchers. In the absence of vouchers. AO has rightly estimated income from tanker running business at Rs. 1,50,000/-. The addition is confirmed. Ground No.2 of the appeal is thus dismissed." 7. We have heard both the parties. Details of tanker running expenses are available at page 7 of the paper book of the assessee. The a/c is as under :- Diseal 2,98,921 TDS 8422 Wages 92,400 Hire charges 2,66,843 Tyres 25,100 Loss 85,217/- Repairing 19,888 Insurance 14,457 Tax 8,550 Measurement Calculation 1,165 4,60,481 &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted that copy of the Declaration was filed with the Income Tax Officer. Income Tax Officer, has not relied upon the acknowledgement for the reason that on the acknowledgement there is no signature of the person receiving the same in the office and further that the declaration should have been filed with the Commissioner of Income Tax. Regarding the first objection humble appellant submits that in normal practice the person receiving the dak only places the seal of the office which contain the date and no signatures are made. The acknowledgement have been obtailned in due course and should not have been doubted. Copies of few acknowledgement even of appeals are submitted herewith from which the contention of appellant is fully proved. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fice of CIT, Kota. In this case neither Form No.15G were filed in the office of CIT, Kota nor in the office of AO. In such a situation the disallowance of Rs. 1,23,370/- made by AO u/s 40(a)(ia) is justified and the same is confirmed. 13. We have heard both the parties. Section 194A requires the assessee to deduct tax at source from interest paid or credited. TDS in respect of interest is not to be made in view of section 197A(1A) in case the person to whom interest is being paid or credited furnishes a declaration to the person responsible for paying or crediting the tax. Failure to furnish forms to the authorities may be a default but for that default 40(a)(ia) can not invoked. Hence the addition of Rs. 1,23,370/- is deleted as the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly submitted that merely because the address has not been got changed by Shri Pawan Agarwal no inference can be drawn against appellant. As the appellant occupied the house during the previous year appellant is entitle to deduction of interest paid on money borrowed." 17. The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of A.O. after observing as under :- "Argument of the appellant is without any force. In the valuation report it is clearly mentioned that first floor and second floor are unfinished. Moreover as mentioned by AO in the assessment order, Ration Card and Telephone bill are also in the name of previous owner and not the appellant. The valuation report mentions that the house is self occupied by owner. It merely indicates that the ....