Addition made for low house hold withdrawals from capital upheld by ITAT rejecting the explanation of of joint family living and expenses
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2492 (2018) 08 ITAT
The instant appeal was filed by the appellant assessee against the order of the CIT(A) in inter alia confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of low house hold drawings / withdrawals.
The assessee’s family consisted of four members and no drawing / withdrawal was made from the capital account towards household expenses. The AO, therefore, estimated the household expenses of the assessee and accordingly made addition to the total income of the assessee.
The CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer on the ground that although there was household withdrawal in capital account in the immediately preceding assessment year, however, there was no such withdrawal during the impugned assessment year.
The explanation of the assessee that his family is residing in a common house with common kitchen with his brother and the household expenses were met out from his withdrawals was rejected by the CIT(A).
The Tribunal opined that the assessee in the instant case had not shown any withdrawal from his capital account towards household expenses, therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A), did not call for any interference.
Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee was dismissed.
Once a finding of intent to avoid payment of tax recorded, the appellate authority before allowing appeal bound to reverse…
Empanelment to act as ICAI exam observers for September / November 2024 CA Examination. Last date to apply is 10.08.2024…
CBDT extends cut off date for investment by Twelve sovereign wealth funds / Pension Funds from 31st March 2024 to…
Appeal against inadequacy of sentence passed by special court in income tax prosecution cases dismissed by High Court In a…
ICSI launches CS Mitr Scheme to give incentive for getting student registered in Executive Programme ICSI has launched CS Mitr…
CPC order u/s 143(1) is appealable and hence the doctrine of merger with order u/s 143(3) do not arise -…