Ita/1056/2017 Of Barun Bhanot v. Assisstant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 23(1
High Court
02 Jul 2019 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Ita/1056/2017 Of Barun Bhanot v. Assisstant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 23(1
Date of order
02 Jul 2019
Assessment year(s)
2008-09
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/1056/2017 Of Barun Bhanot v. Assisstant Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle 23(1, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 1056/2017 BARUN BHANOT ..... Appellant
..... Appellant
Through: Mr.K.R.Manjani, Advocate.
versus
ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 23(1)
..... Respondent Through: Mr.Ajit Shharma with Ms.Adeeba Mujahid, Advocate.
CORAM:JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
O R D E R02.07.2019
%
1. This is the Assessee’s appeal against an order dated 30[th] June 2017 passed
by the ITAT in ITA No.3075/Del/2014 for the assessment year 2008-09. By the order dated 14[th] August 2018, this Court confined the notice in the appeal only to the quantum of addition made by disallowance of the expenditure to the extent of 12.5% (wrongly noted as 25% in the order) and to the addition of Rs.4,73,047/- being 8.12% of Rs.58,25,710/- on which TDS was deducted.
2. The Court notes from the findings of the impugned order of the ITAT that the Assessee was unable to produce the books of accounts which had been prepared by the Chartered Accountant (‘CA’). The CA, who was asked to appear before the AO, did not participate in the assessment proceedings. All that was available before the AO were the statement of bank accounts and
some sketchy details from which no proper assessment could be made. However, the ITAT took a reasonable view of the matter and reduced the disallowance from 25% to 12.5%.
3. The Court is unable to find any substantial question of law arising as far as the above issue is concerned.
4. As far as addition of Rs.4.73 lacs is concerned, this became necessary as the Assessee was unable to explain the corresponding income in respect of which the TDS has been deducted. Even on this issue, the Court is unable to find any substantial question of law arising from the impugned order of the ITAT.
5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
JULY 02, 2019
tr
TALWANT SINGH, J.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.