2015 (7) TMI 394 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s. 144 - unexplained cash purchases/sales - additions/disallowances as unexplained income - Held that - Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) duly examined the facts u/s. 68 along with various case laws and finally affirmed the additions as unexplained income u/s. 68 of the Act by examining each assessment year separately. We are satisfied with the reasoning contained in the impugned order under the facts and the circumstances available on record. We have also examined the material available on record and considered the submissions of ld. CIT-DR. before us also the attitude of the assessee is same as the assessee merely filed the appeals and neither filed necessary details nor represented its case and inspite of repeated final opportunities. Today, as mentioned earlier the assessee even did not bother to attend the proceedings or to seek adjournment. In the totality of the facts, material available on record, attitude of the assessee it clearly oozes out that the assessee has nothing to say in his defence. Thus, we find no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), consequently all these appeals are having no merit, therefore, dismissed. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Challenging consolidated order confirming ex-parte assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, confirming total sales as unexplained income, and making disallowance under section 40A(3) for purchases made in cash exceeding Rs. 20,000 for different assessment years.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appeals were filed by the assessee challenging the consolidated order confirming the ex-parte assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, total sales treated as unexplained income, and disallowance under section 40A(3) for cash purchases exceeding Rs. 20,000. Despite repeated opportunities, the assessee did not appear for hearings, leading to the proceedings being conducted ex-parte. The Assessing Officer and the First Appellate Authority found the assessee to be non-cooperative and habitual in non-compliance with filing necessary details.

2. A search and survey action under sections 132 and 133A of the Act was conducted in the case of a specific group, and notices were issued to the assessee for non-filing of returns and non-compliance with requests for details. The Assessing Officer framed the assessment under section 144 based on available material, highlighting unexplained cash transactions in the textile trading business of the assessee group. The additions and disallowances made for different assessment years were detailed in the assessment order.

3. On appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee continued to seek adjournments without filing necessary details or attending hearings. The Commissioner examined the facts and circumstances, considering the non-compliance of the assessee with various notices and opportunities provided. The Commissioner affirmed the additions as unexplained income under section 68 of the Act for each assessment year separately, based on the available record and the attitude of the assessee in not cooperating or presenting a defense.

4. The Commissioner's decision was upheld by the Appellate Tribunal, noting the repeated non-appearance and non-cooperation of the assessee throughout the proceedings. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeals, as the assessee failed to provide necessary details, attend hearings, or present a defense, leading to the dismissal of all appeals. The judgment was pronounced in the open court in the presence of representatives from both sides.