TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1727
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Rs. 3.00 lakhs). 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,18,279/- u/s. 68 of the Act being the difference as per the accounts of the assessee and the amounts on which TDS had been deducted by the parties as per Form 26AS, the authenticity of which the assessee had no access. 3. That the orders of the Ld. authorities below being contrary the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the appeal be allowed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 20.9.2012 declaring income at Rs. 51,98,820/- and later the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r dated 17.5.2016, assessee is in appeal before us. 3. During the hearing, Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the disallowance out of expenses claimed under the heads Site Expenses (Rs. 5.00 lakhs) and Consumable (Rs. 3.00 lakhs). He further submitted that ld. CIT(A) also wrongly confirming the addition of Rs. 3,18,279/- u/s. 68 of the Act being the difference as per the accounts of the assessee and the amounts on which TDS had been deducted by the parties as per Form 26AS, the authenticity of which the assessee had no access. In support of his contention, he filed a small Paper Book containing pages 1-51 i.e copy of letter to CIT(A) with enclosures i.e. copy of balance sheet and accounts for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee are on distinguished facts. It is further noted that AO has only disallowed Rs. 5 lacs out of Rs. 2.10 crore claimed as site expenses and Rs. 3 lakhs out of Rs. 1.24 crore claimed as expenses on account of consumables, hence, the amount of disallowances are quite justified and accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly confirmed the additions on these counts, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the action of the Ld. CIT(A) on these additions and accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the assessee stand dismissed. 5.1 As regards addition of Rs. 3,18,279/- u/s. 68 of the Act is concerned, we find that this addition relates to differences in the receipts declared by the assessee and the receipts sh....