Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Brahmaputra Infrastructure Limited (ITAT Gauhati)
ITAT have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. Revenue is aggrieved with the deletion of addition of unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act at Rs.4,71,13,264/-. We, on perusal of the finding of the lower authorities notice that Mr. P.D. Deoarah is the director in M/s. Sati Oil Udyog Limited and M/s Assam Vegetable Oil Products Limited. As per the audited books of accounts for FY 2017-18, the closing balance of M/s. Sati Oil Udyog Limited as on 31/03/2018 is stated at Rs.4,09,27,220/- cannot be doubted. These audited financial statements were part of the income tax return filed by the assessee much prior to the date of search. Therefore, genuineness of the closing balance of M/s. Sati Oil Udyog Limited at Rs. Rs.4,09,27,220/- is established.
The remaining amount i.e., Rs.4,71,13,264/- (-) Rs.4,09,27,220/- is the sum at Rs.61,86,004/-. Before us, two fold contentions have been made by the ld. A/R. Firstly, that there is a payment of Rs.62,00,000/-during financial year 2018-19 but it has been wrongly considered by the accountant preparing ledger appearing in the seized documents MB/HD/01 in FY 2017-18, then the alleged balance of Rs.4,71,13,264/-will be reconciled. Second fold of contentions is that the assessee had already offered additional income of Rs.2,46,27,154/- and against this additional income, the assessee has urged for telescoping benefit of Rs.61,86,044/-. We find merit in the second fold of contention and agree with the finding of the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee deserves telescoping benefit of Rs.61,86,044/- against the additional income offered to tax. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 raised by the revenue is hereby dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT GUWAHATI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
