TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2813
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... we take up the assessee's appeals. The first common issue is with regard to disallowance of expenses made uniformly @ 2.5% of the expenditure. 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, a producer of feature films and also the Secretary of the Youth wing of DMDK. An action under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted in case of the assessee on 23.01.2007 subsequent to which, assessments under section 153A r.w.s. 143(3) were completed for the assessment years 2001-02, 02-03, 03-04 04-05, 05-06 and 07-08. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee has debited expenses in the income and expenditure account and the Assessing Officer has asked the assessee to produce details t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under: "7. After careful consideration of the orders of Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(Appeals) and considering the submissions of the assessee as made before the ld. CIT(Appeals), we find that the assessee had claimed certain expenditure and no supporting evidences have been filed before the Assessing Officer. However, before the ld. CIT(Appeals), some vouchers were filed, which were perused in the presence of the Assessing Officer and found that some vouchers are self-vouched. The ld. CIT(Appeals), keeping in view all the factors, restricted the disallowance from 5% to 2.5%. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and accordingly, we dismiss the grounds raised by the Revenue for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alling to Rs. 14,28,240/- being drawn from the said company. The CIT(A) observed that there is no explanation in respect of cash brought in to the total Rs. 3,20,000/- and also there is no explanation towards stamp duty and registration charges paid at Rs. 1,93,905/-. As such, out of the total addition of Rs. 10,69,842/-, the CIT(A) sustained addition of Rs. 3,20,000/- and Rs. 1,93,905/- and deleted the balance amount. 11. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee has filed the cash flow statement before the lower authorities duly explaining the source of fund to make investment of Rs. 10,69,842/- which was not properly appreciated by them and prayed for an opportunity to explain the same before the lowe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 15. We have heard both parties and perused the material on record. According to the ld. Counsel, the CIT(A) satisfied about the source of fund in assessment year 2003-04 that it came from M/s LKS Petroleum India Pvt. Ltd. The CIT(A) is not justified in giving direction to the Assessing Officer to consider the same in assessment year 2004-05. In our opinion, if the cheque is issued from LKS Petroleum India Pvt. Ltd and is duly reflected in the books of account of LKS Petroleum India Pvt. Ltd and they are filing return of income then there is no question of treating the same in the hands of assessee as unexplained investment in assessment year 2004-05. As such, the assessee has to explain the same before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tuus and hence, dismissed. 18. In the result, I.T.A.Nos.691, 693, 695, 696 and 697/Mds/2013 are dismissed. I.T.A.Nos.692 and 694/Mds/2013 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 19. Now, we take up the appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2006-07 in I.T.A.No.714/Mds/2013. 20. The first ground in Revenue's appeal is with regard to granting relief @ 2.5% of the expenses as against 5% disallowed by the Assessing Officer. 21. We have already decided similar issue in Revenue's appeals for assessment years 2001-02 to 2005-06 & 2007-08 in I.T.A.Nos.709 to 715/Mds/2013, order dated 23.8.2015. As the facts are similar in assessment year 2006-07, following the above order of the Tribunal, we dismiss this ground of appeal. 22.....