HASMUKH NATVARLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC and grievously erred in confirming the Of Rs AO has receipts and estimating 30% Income 6,81,562/- on receipts 3. Your appellant craves leave to add/alter or amend any of the grounds till the appeal is finally heard and decided. 3. The brief facts case are that during the course of assessment proceedings, it was noticed that assessee had received an amount of Rs. 22,71,874/- as contractual receipt on which TDS had deducted and assessee has not shown any such income in the return filed. The Assessing Officer, therefore, rejected the books of account u/s.245A and made the additions of Rs.6,81,562/- on account of profit @ 30% of the gross receipt. Further, an addition of Rs.6,27,795/- was made u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of unexplained investment. 4. Aggrieved against the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The assessee has submitted that the contractual receipts in question have already been offered to tax in the partnership firm. The juri ictional Assessing Officer is, therefore, directed to verify the same. With respect to the addition relating to unexplained investment in fixed deposits, the Assessing Officer is directed to provide an opportunity to the assessee to explain the source thereof. Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3–

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.