TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2791
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as under:- "1. Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,66,753/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on account of unexplained capital. 2. Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 65,274/- made by the AO on account of difference in loan account as per bank statement and as per Balance Sheet. 3. Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 22,83,288/- made by the AO out of payment of wages. 4.Whether in law on facts & circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,70,0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel and perusing the record, we find that since in the remand report the Assessing Officer himself has accepted that the assessee has explained the details of the source of capital introduced, no addition in this case is warranted. In fact, Revenue's grievance in filing the appeal, while the Assessing Officer himself is accepted the veracity, is not justified. Hence, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A). Apropos Ground No.2 : Deletion of addition of Rs. 65,274/- on account of difference in loan account as per bank statement and balance-sheet. 6. On this addition also learned CIT(A) obtained remand report from the Assessing Officer. In the remand report, the Assessing Officer stated that "it appears that the same addition has b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cepted the claim of wages of Rs. 98,39,167/- subject to minor disallowance of Rs. 70,000/-; hence holding that without rejecting the books of accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer could not make ad-hoc disallowance from the wage payment. Hence, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition. 9. Against the above order, the Revenue is in appeal before us. 10. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has not maintained proper record and vouchers for the wages paid; hence, he submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly made the disallowance. Per contra, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the assessee has maintained proper vouchers. He submitted that in the line of assessee's business p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ept for marginal increase. In the subsequent assessment year also, the Assessing Officer has accepted the wages paid, except a minor disallowance of Rs. 70,000/-. Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion, the ad-hoc disallowance is not sustainable. However, when confronted in this regard that there has been a marginal increase in the percentage of wages to the gross receipt and the fact that wages are not 100% verifiable, the learned Counsel of the assessee agreed for a small disallowance. We also find that one of the pleas in support of the deletion of the addition taken by the learned Counsel of the assessee relied upon the learned CIT(A) is the fact that in the subsequent assessment year the payment of wags was accepted by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... loans were brought forward from the preceding years Balance Sheet. Thus, the addition is not warranted during the year under consideration. As regards fresh loan of Rs. 2,00,000/- taken during the year from Mr. G.R. Nishad, it is seen that the appellant has placed on record, copy of income tax return, capital position, bank statement and confirmation of account. The AO in the Remand Report stated as under: "On verification of the copies of the accounts of Shri G.r. Nishad, it is found that he is a person of little means having yearly income of about Rs. 1 lacs; that the bank accounts of Shri G.R. Nishad with Punjab National Bank reflects that Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited on 29.08.2006 and the same was given to S.P. & Associates on....