2019 (4) TMI 1214

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the 'Act'). 2. The grounds of appeal read as under: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions of Rs. 1,44,75,355/- as undisclosed income based upon mis-match of AIR Information and Books of accounts of the company on account of TDS deducted by these customers of the appellant company. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions of Rs. 30,00,000/- u/s 69 of the Act as Undisclosed Investments based upon AIR Information as reported by banks on account of FDR held with them. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the additions of Rs. 1,74,75,355/- without assessing off....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vice tax element of Rs. 79,06,616/- from the gross receipt. Thus, the AO made an addition of the balance amount of Rs. 1,44,75,355/- (Rs.2,23,81,971/- minus Rs. 79,06,616/-). 3.1 Also the AO found that the assessee failed to file any supporting document or evidence in respect of mismatch of Rs. 30,00,000/- with regard to AIR reconciliation for FDR with bank. In response to a query raised by the AO, the assessee submitted that "as the time gap is too short to get the details from bank, we are unable to submit the reconciliation of bank FDR". As the assessee failed to file any supporting document/evidence, the AO made an addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- u/s 69 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Book (P/B) containing (i) Comparative statement of gross receipts as per 26AS and Ledger Accounts, (ii) Copy of 26AS for the financial year 2009-10 relevant to the assessment year 2010-11, (iii) Copy of 26AS for the financial year 2010-11 relevant to the assessment year 2011-12, (iv) Copy of 26AS for the financial year 2011-12 relevant to the assessment year 2012-13, (v) Copy of the ledger account of Dishnet Wireless - Aircel for the financial year ended 31.03.2010, 31.03.2011, 31.03.2012, (vi) Copy of ledger account of Unitech Wireless for the financial year ended 31.03.2010, 31.03.2011, 31.03.2012, (vii) Copy of ledger account of Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd. for the financial year ended 31.03.2010, 31.03.2011, 31.03.2012, (viii) Copy o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... filing the TDS return, TTPL claimed that a sum of Rs. 1.26 lakhs was paid to the assessee. However, the assessee claimed that out of the above amount, a sum of Rs. 58.3 lakh was being credited to the assessee wrongly and actually the assessee received Rs. 64.84 lakh from TTPL. The assessee claimed that credit of Rs. 58.36 lakh was a wrong entry and TTPL had not filed revised TDS return electronically. The AO addressed letter to TTPL. As the said letter was not responded, the AO treated the particulars contained in Form 26AS as correct and treated Rs. 56.36 lakhs shown in Form 26AS as undisclosed received of the assessee. On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO. On further appeal, the Tribunal held that: "6. This Tribun....