2018 (1) TMI 1605

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0% of Rs. 1,97,231/- made by the AO. 2. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 43,70,000/- on account of unexplained investment u/s 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. (a) The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous and not tenable in law and on facts. (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any/all of the ground of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 3. As regards to the issue agitated by the department in Ground No. 1, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is covered by the order dated 26.10.2010 of this Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No. 1747/Del/2009 for the a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....smallness of amount of dividend income and smallness of the amount of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, it will meet the ends of justice if the disallowance is made to the extent of 10% of dividend income because considering the smallness of amount in dispute, we do not feel it fruitful to restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision as we are doing in other cases where the stakes are high. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to 10% of dividend income." 6. In the present case also, the ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to the extent of 10% of the income while the AO made the dis....