Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2.4. The ld. CIT(A.) ought not to have confirmed the addition of Rs.37,295/- out of the addition made by A.O. relying upon the statement of the proprietor of Dharti Medical Store.
Addition of Sonography Receipts 3.1. The ld. CIT(A.) has grievously erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs.69,497/- as unaccounted Sonography receipts.
3.2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A.) ought not to have confirmed that the appellant had not fully disclosed Sonography receipts especially with regard to the alleged patients as per Dharti Medical Stores.
Addition of Rs.57,000/- Considering the said submissions and the chart filed at page 79 of paper book and considering the fact that (1904) patients as per the bills of M/s.Dharti Medical Store would not have been referred by the appellant doctor alone, only 1/4th of bills can be presumed to be patients referred by [he appellant doctor and assuming 20% patients have undergone sonography test, i.e. 380 for l/4th of 330 cases i.e. 95 cases are considered as against 380 and considering the average amount of Rs.125/- as sonography charge per patient, as in some cases, the appellant has charged Rs.100/- and in some cases Rs.150/-, the addition is sustained for 95 patients @ 125/- as sonography receipt which comes to Rs.11,875/- as against Rs.57,000/-.
5.4. Addition of Rs.5l,809/- Out of 6 cases, for which sonography has been carried out of 15 patients examined as per page 79 of paper book which is Annexure-P, the appellant has not shown receipts in respect of 4 patients and has shown receipts for only 2 patients as per Annexure P, which shows that the appellant has not accounted for 4 patients out of 6 patients which comes to 66%. Therefore, the addition is reduced to 66% of receipts of Rs.59,550/- from sonography accounted by the appellant which comes to Rs.39,303/- instead of Rs 51,809/-. So addition of Rs.5 1,809/- is reduced to Rs.39,303/-.
5.5. Addition of Rs.6,426/- The A.O. observed that the appellant has shown less sonography charge @ Rs.50/- instead of Rs.150/- in 13% of the cases.. As I have found that the average rate of sonography charged is Rs.l25/- and the appellant has shown sonography receipts in 2 out of 6 cases as per Annexure P which comes to 33% , 33 % of receipts of Rs.59,500/- are considered and the receipts shown less work out to Rs.19,635/- as against which the appellant has shown Rs.1,316/-