TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 1208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. CIT(A) - 6, Kolkata dated 30.12.2014 and the same are being disposed of along with the cross-objection filed by the assessee being C.O. No. 19/Kol/2015. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of trading in wall colours, distemper etc. The return of income for the year under consideration was originally filed by him in the physical form on 29.09.2010 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,04,475/-. Thereafter, the return of income of the assessee for the year under consideration was again filed electronically on 26.05.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 1,58,475/-. The said ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ges 9,232 0 Misc. Expenses 4,520 0 Tea & Tiffin 9,272 0 Office Expenses 0 34,125 Rates & Taxes 0 18,652 Puja & Ent. Expenses 0 79,823 Sales Promotion 0 8,49,025 Advertisement 0 18,720 Telephone Charges 0 82,364 Staff Welfare 0 60,254 Carriage Outward 0 12,54,827 Postage & Stamps 0 21,526 Packing Charges 0 7,96,445 Commission paid 0 21,26,432 Bank Charges 0 25,481 Legal & Audit Fees 0 68,720 Depreciation 0 1,08,650 Net Profit 4,15,475 9,15,475 3. The A.O. also noted that there was a remarkable difference in the balance sheet figures as well as the deductions claimed by the assessee under Chapter VIA as under: Item Return filed on 29.09.2010 Return filed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mated basis) Rs. 6,51,064/- 4. Against the order passed by the A.O. under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). Although the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) agreed that the subsequent return of income on 26.05.2011 was electronically filed by him, he submitted that the same was filed with the sole motive of obtaining bank loan. The assessee, however, could not produce any evidence to support and substantiate the figures furnished either in the return originally filed in physical form or in the returns subsequently filed in electronic form. Taking note of the same as well as keeping in view the fact that no books of accounts were regularly maintained by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2010 against the due date of 31.07.2010 was a belated one and therefore the return of income filed on 26.05.2011 and treated by the Assessing Officer as the revised return was not a valid return. Elaborating further, he has submitted that the turnover of the assessee as shown in the original return of income was less than Rs. 40,00,000/- and since the assessee was not required to get his accounts audited, the due for filing his return of income for the year under consideration was 31.07.2010. He has submitted that the regular return of income filed by the assessee originally on 29.09.2010 thus was a belated one and the assessee was not entitled to file the revised return as per th....