TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 1473
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aring total income of Rs. 1,16,41,540/-. The assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 21.06.2012 at return income. During the examination of record, it was noticed that the assessee had declared total receipts of Rs. 18,91,17,934/-, however, as per ITS data, the total receipts were Rs. 19,42,22,978/-. Therefore, after recording reasons and taking approval from the Principal CIT-I Jaipur, notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') was issued on 31.03.2016. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish explanation for difference of receipts. The assessee has furnished reply, but has not furnished any justification or explanation about Rs. 72,76,821/-. The assessee did not disclose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....21/- on account of undisclosed receipt. But, the Tribunal as well as the CIT(A) have erred by not considering the difference amount of Rs. 72,76,821/- as undisclosed receipt of the assessee made by the assessing officer. The Tribunal has failed to consider the fact that the assessee has claimed deduction of service payable on Rs. 1,61,36,763/-. However, this amount was not paid to the Central Excise Department during the year under consideration and thus, the assessee has not claimed deduction of full amount in the profit and loss account. The Tribunal has failed to consider the fact that as per the service tax return the assessee has shown the receipt of Rs. 15,02,04,707/-. whereas as per the bill raised including the service tax the amoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturn and in service tax return. * The appellant has claimed that some parties have wrongly credited the amount in its account but the evidences were not produced. In view of the above observations, it was concluded by the AO that the appellant has not disclosed receipts to the tune of Rs. 72,76,821/-. (ii) It is noted from the from the reconciliation statement that gross receipts shown in service tax return and gross receipts shown in books of accounts are as under: Amount for which invoices issued as per service tax return Amount received agaisnt service provided as per service tax return Total 1,8,62,42,673/- 15,02,04,707/- Less: credit note issued during the year 40,90,034/- -....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....81,09,923.18 Less:- Service tax included in receipts as per 26AS (1,61,36,563) Net receipts as per 26AS 18,19,73,360.18 Receipts as per books of accounts excluding service tax 18,91,17,934/- The amount paid by the customers on which no TDS was made. 71,44,574 (v) Thus, it is evident from the above details that the appellant has /declared more receipts (revenue) than shown in 26AS and it is on account of the element of service tax on which TDS was made by the customers/ deductor of the appellant, the amount in 26AS is appearing on the higher side. Therefore, in view of the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is held that the AO was not justified in making impug....