TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 283
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this sufficient documentary support before the AO. 2. That the ld CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts ignoring the fact that the books of accounts so produced by assessee were not supported by any supporting evidence and he failed to discharge its onus. 3. Therefore, the order of the ld CIT(A) be cancelled or set aside and the order of the AO may be restored." 3. The ground No. 1 and 2 of the appeal are that the ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 9263310/- without appreciating the absence of documentary support as evidence. 4. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is earning income from business filed his return of income on 30.08.2009 of Rs. 495153/-. During the course of assessment proceedings it was noted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....B Engineering Limited, Pune-I, have also considered the submissions made by the AC where he has observed that it is noticed from the details of credit entries of the bank account that the deposit in the bank account works out to R.s. 2,64,78,650/- (after giving benefit of increase in sundry debtors & TDS) whereas the turnover declared by the assessee amounted to Rs. 3,73,95,699/- resulting into difference of Rs. 92,87,700/-. The assessee was asked to reconcile the difference. In response vide reply dated 14.12.11, AR of the assessee furnished the reconciliation and from which it was noticed that he has also taken into account transfer entry iron, one bank account to other also, cash deposit and also claimed material received from deductor o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would lead to addition to the income of the appellant, i. Cost of material deducted by the principle Rs. 85,26,003/- ii. PF Deduction Rs.7,07,504/- iii. Medical and other deductions Rs.29,803/- Rs. 92,63,3 10/- The documents and the reply filed by the appellant were forwarded by the to the AO for his comments and a reply was received from the AO that the assessee did not make compliance on the date fixed for the verification. I also find that the appellant has rebutted the contention of the AO by stating that the date mentioned by the AO for compliance do not match with the date of the letter alleged to have been issued by him . Thus, all the documents such as certified vouchers of the supply of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ited to the profit and loss account. I agree with the appellant's contention that the AC) was required to verify the contention of deduction of cost of material out of the payment made to the appellant by U.B. Engineering Limited besides deduction for PI' and medical expenses etc. In support of these deductions the complete set of paper book containing certified copies of the statement of account of the appellant from the books of U.B. Engineering Limited, the certify copy of the vouchers and statement showing day to day supply of material and the cost deducted out of the payment were all forwarded to the AO and nothing more was required sir/,-these were already available before him. The AO was required to verify -lie claim of the....