TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 1028
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on non appreciation of facts of the case and law. 2. That under the given facts and circumstances and in Law, Ld. AO grossly erred in disallowing 50% of Labour and Wages expenses amounting to Rs. 257800.00 That the addition of Income is made due to non confirmation of Labour in Financial Year December 2007 for period of operation in Financial Year 1996-97. The AO has completely ignored the fact that Company production was already closed before the Financial Year 2007. The Ld. AO has disallowed 50% of Labour and Wages which is an assumed and hypothetical figure. In the Income Tax Act, no section supports such a wild decision of AO. However, the section 44AF if read carefully, reads out the percentage assumed for all expenses including deprec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....b workers providing Fabrication work in Financial Year December 2007 for period of operation in Financial Year 1996-97. The AO has completely ignored the fact that Company production was already closed before the Financial Year 2007. The Ld. AO has disallowed 50% of Fabrication expense which is an assumed and hypothetical figure. In the Income Tax Act, no section supports such a wild decision of AO. However, the section 44AF if read carefully, reads out the percentage assumed for all expenses including depreciation to be 95% and 5% of the sale to be income of the assessee. The Ld. AO had no intention to bring the matter of assessment on a fair trial of the assessee and so he completely ignored and overlooked section 44AF which is t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 1366636/-. In the assessment order, the Ld. AO made 50% of the disallowance out of labour wages expenses, embroidery charges, fabrication expenses, and power and fuel expenses. An addition of Rs. 377660/- CIT was also made with respect to unexplained credits with respect to two parties. 4. Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A, who vide order dated 21/01/2011 confirmed the above addition. Against which assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Despite notice, none appeared on behalf of assessee and therefore the issue is decided on merit based on the facts available on record. 6. Ld. departmental representative relied upon the order of the Lord assessing officer. 7. We have carefully considered the contentions of the L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the assessee is also made payment through third parties. The notices issued to the parties under section 133(6) have also returned as unserved. However, the basic fact to be noted is that the assessee has closed its business in December 2007 when the assessment was framed. Further, the Ld. assessing officer has made the disallowances at the rate of 50% of all the expenditure, which is not acceptable. In view of the fact that assessee is shown a receipt of Rs. 25 Lacs and out of which all these expenditures have been incurred by the assessee. Had the assessing officer has any doubt about the payment in cash, then such doubtful expenditure should have been disallowed and not ad hoc expenditure should be disallowed. It was also not pointed o....