2025 (12) TMI 149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d order of assessment made by the learned CIT (Appeals) vide his order dated 26.02.2024 on the following grounds:- 1) That the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts, overlooking the fundamental fact that the cited expenditure was never incurred. The document referred to merely constitute a rough estimate from a plumber and was not indicative of any actual payment, as explicitly stated on the face of it. Treating this as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C due to the Respondent's dissatisfaction with the Appellant's submission, and upholding the additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer, renders the action unjust & invalid. 2) The learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on fact by confirming ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iness and residential premises. Subsequently, the assessee filed his regular Return of Income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 30.12.2021, declaring thereon a Total Income of Rs. 15,32,730/- for the year under consideration. The assessee is an individual who runs a proprietorship concern in the name and style of 'M/s Neeraj Kumar Anuj Kumar' which deals in retail trade of FMCG goods and declared income under the heads 'income from salary', 'Profit & Gains from Business & Profession' & 'Income from other sources for the period under consideration. Further, the AO has mentioned that during, the assessment proceedings, it is noticed that, an image was found and seized from the mobile phone of the assessee during the course ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by him. Hence, the AO held that the cash expenditure amounting to Rs. 95,640/- by the assessee was treated as unexplained as per the provisions of the section 69C." 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 28/12/2022, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 26/02/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 26/02/2024, the Assessee preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the issue involved in the present appeal is covered with the order of the Tribunal having similar facts of a family member i.e. Neeraj Singh for Assessment Year 2021-22 in ITA No. 124/DDN/2025. Thu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al of the said loose sheets, we find that these papers are some estimates and rough notings. There is no mention of receiver of payment or identity of person who possibly existed and had received any payment. There is no ITA No. 124/DDN/2024 Neeraj Singhal Page 6 evidence to prove that the said loose sheet represent payments made by the assessee so as to either invoke the provisions of section 40A(3) or section 69C of the Act. The said loose sheet does not even mention that it represent either payment or receipt. Hence, we hold that these loose sheets are mere dumb documents not corroborated with any other extraneous link with the transactions of the assessee or his business. Hence, we have no hesitation to delete the said additions made in....