TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 559
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 22 days in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal and the assessee has filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case that, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in business of manufacturing and sale of karadant/sweet. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 on 18-03-2014 disclosing a total income of Rs. 14,64,500/- subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued. There was surv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed additional income and also the statement was recorded u/s 131 of the Act. The Pr.CIT has dealt on the facts and observed that the assessee has offered lower income compared to the income declared during the course of survey and since the assessee was unable to explain the source of investment and additional income declared in the hands of the assessee and hence has to be taxed u/s 115BBE of the Act. Whereas the A.O. in the financial statements has accepted the same as normal business income and has allowed remuneration to the partners. The Pr. CIT has considered the facts that the income is generated out of the business and treated as normal business but the Pr.CIT is of the opinion that the provisions of Section 69 & 69A and Sec 115BBE ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the A.O. dealt on the provisions of the Act, submissions, judicial decisions, statement recorded and made addition u/sec 69 & 69A of the Act and disallowed excess partner remuneration of partner s and assessed the total income of Rs. 76,30,727/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 21-11-2017. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O. the assessee has filed appeal with the CIT whereas the CIT (appeals) considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, finding of A.O. and submissions but confirmed the action of the A.O. and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, the learned A.R. submitted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the excess declaration made and therefore income declared during the survey cannot be automatically be treated as deemed income. The learned AR substantiated the submissions with the factual paper book and judicial decisions and prayed for allowing the appeal. Per contra, the learned D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A). 7. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The learned A.R. envisaged that the CIT(A) has erred in overlooking the submission, factual aspects and the directions issued in the revisionary proceedings and has wrongly confirm the action of the assessee. On the first disputed issue, with respect to directions in the revision order, the Pr.CIT observed that the A.O. has not properly examined whet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the excess stock, the learned A.R. contentions are that the excess stock amount pertaining to the business operations and they were part of the business operations and the excess stock found during the course of survey is related to the assessee business and same should be assessed as business income and not under Sections 69 and 69A of the Act. Further the learned A.R. also relied on financial statements and the statement recorded and explained that the income is earned from the business activities of the assessee and the Income Tax Department has not relied on the any corroborative evidences to establish that income is from unexplained sources. The learned A.R relied on the fallowing judicial decisions. (i) The Deputy Commissio....