Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (7) TMI 1322 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
Assessment of unexplained cash deposits in savings and current accounts for assessment year 2009-10.

Analysis:
The appellant, an individual earning income from a Snack Bar Business, challenged the addition of cash deposits into savings and current accounts totaling &8377; 6,01,489 and &8377; 9,40,000 respectively. The Assessing Officer (AO) noted cash deposits of &8377; 41,80,050 in the savings account and additional deposits in the current account. The AO treated the difference between the bank credits and turnover as cash credits, adding the amounts to the total income. The appellant failed to provide satisfactory explanations for the source of these deposits, leading to the additions. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the AO's decision, considering the deposits unexplained. The appellant contended that the deposits were part of disclosed turnover, arguing for estimation of only the Gross Profit (GP) on these amounts. However, the appellant could not substantiate this claim with sales details or purchases. The Tribunal noted that once purchases and expenses were recorded in the books, estimating additional income was unwarranted. The appellant also argued that the AO's action exceeded the scope of Sec.285A by considering current account deposits. The Tribunal disagreed, upholding the AO's authority under Sec.69 to treat unexplained deposits as income when the source remains unproven.

Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the additions as unexplained income under Sec.69 of the Income Tax Act. The appellant's arguments regarding disclosed turnover and the scope of Sec.285A were deemed insufficient to overturn the lower authorities' decisions.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates