TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 753
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs passed by Ld. CIT(A)- 11, Bengaluru. All these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, for the sake of convenience. 2. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee herein is a partnership firm belonging to Shri K. Mahesh Kumar family. The revenue carried out search & seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act on 25.10.2010. On account of search operations, all the cases of assessees belonging to the family were centralised. The assessee, initially, filed its return of income u/s 139 of the Act on 9.12.2010 declaring a total income of Rs. 22,48,790/-. In the search proceedings, Shri Mahesh Kumar furnished a letter dated 28.3.2011 before the investigation officials, wherein he agreed to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....same and furnished only bank statements. Hence, the assessing officer proceeded to complete the assessment to the best of his judgement u/s 144 of the Act. 5. The A.O. noticed that the assessee has declared gross income of Rs. 21.05 crores and declared profit of Rs. 4.22 crores. Accordingly, the AO observed that the assessee has claimed expenses to the tune of Rs. 16.83 crores. During the assessment proceedings the A.O. asked the assessee to submit details like nature of expenses, supporting bills or vouchers, details of purchases, permits for purchase of iron ore, transportation details, etc. Since the assessee did not furnish the details, the A.O. disallowed 20% of expenses i.e. 20% of Rs. 16.82 crores, which worked out to Rs. 3.36 cro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A.R. submitted that the assessee has offered the income of Rs. 4.22 crores on estimated basis on the total turnover of Rs. 21.05 crores. When the income is estimated, there is no scope for making any disallowance of expenses. When a specific query was raised as to how the return of income was furnished u/s 139 of the Act, the Ld A.R submitted that the books of accounts of the assessee have been misplaced. He submitted that this fact was brought to the notice of the department by Shri K Mahesh Kumar in his letter dated 28-03-2011. Accordingly he submitted that the assessee was constrained to estimate the income and further, it could not furnish various details called for by the AO. In any case, while filing return of income in response to no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eparate disallowance of Rs. 3.36 crores out of the expenses. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the A.O. to delete the disallowance. 12. We shall now take up the appeal filed by the revenue relating to deletion of protective addition relating to unexplained bank deposits. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the protective addition, for the reason that the unexplained bank deposits has been confirmed by him on substantive basis in the hands of Shri K. Mahesh Kumar. The Ld. A.R. submitted that Shri K Mahesh kumar filed appeals before Tribunal challenging the above said decision of Ld CIT(A). The said appeals filed by Shri K. Mahesh Kumar before the Tribunal in ITA No.1819 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he very same reasons discussed above, while dealing with an identical issue in assessment year 2010-11. 15. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the protective addition on the reasoning that he has confirmed the addition on substantive basis in the hands of Shri K. Mahesh Kumar. The revenue is aggrieved. 16. For the reasons discussed on an identical issue in assessment year 2010-11, this issue needs to be set aside to the file of Ld CIT(A), i.e. we have noticed that the Tribunal has restored the substantive addition made in the hands of Shri K. Mahesh Kumar to the file of Ld. CIT(A) in AY 2011-12 also and hence, this issue needs to be set aside to his file for examining it afresh along with the appeal of Shri K Mahesh Kumar. Accordingly, we rest....