Income Tax

No household expenses withdrawal claiming husband paid all expenses not justified – ITAT

Addition for no withdrawal for household expenses-Contention that husband met out all expenses did not justify nil withdrawal by assessee wife – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2549 (2018) 09 ITAT

No household expenses withdrawal claiming husband paid all expenses

The Case was selected for scrutiny through Computer Assistance Scrutiny Section (CASS) and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were duly served upon the appellant assessee along with questionnaire.

The Assessing Officer (AO) while examining the audited capital account observed that during the relevant assessment year, the assessee had not made any withdrawal for household expenses.

Not satisfied with the reply of the assessee, the AO made an addition towards low house hold withdrawals for Rs. 1,50,000/-

The CIT(A) maintained the addition.

The Tribunal noted that as per the audited capital account no withdrawals were shown by the assessee for household expenses and it was claimed that the household withdrawals of her husband was sufficient.

The Tribunal observed that no cash had been withdrawn by the assessee towards household expenses.

The Tribunal opined that the contention that assessee’s husband took care of total household expenditure could not justify that the assessee was not required to make any withdrawal for household expenses.

The Tribunal confirmed the findings of CIT(A) for the addition of Rs.1,00,000/-.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Also Read:

Cash flow statement rejected for no household drawings Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

2 days ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

4 days ago
  • Insurance

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price

CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…

6 days ago
  • GST

Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities

Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

No protective addition required when additions is confirmed in hands of searched person – ITAT

No protective addition required in the hand of a third party when additions have been confirmed in the hands of…

7 days ago