9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 860 - AT - Income TaxUnexplained cash deposits in the Bank Account u/s 69 A - rejection of higher agricultural income - HELD THAT - DR relying upon the impugned order submitted that already more than adequate relief has been granted to the assessee and nothing is placed on record to justify any further relief. As submitted that even if the issue had to be decided on the basis of the estimates, even then the general arguments that the cash withdrawals constituted the source of the deposits without any evidence cannot out rightly be accepted. Nothing has been placed before the ITAT to assail the said finding or grant any further relief. I have heard the submissions and perused the material available on record, I find that the Ld. CIT(A) in the order passed has been more than fair.There is no argument, evidence or fact on record justifying any further relief. Accordingly the grounds raised for want of any justification for modifying the order passed are rejected. The finding under challenge is upheld. Said Order was pronounced on the open Court at the time of hearing itself. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Issues:
1. Correctness of Orders dated 05.12.2017 of CIT(A)- Muzaffarnagar for 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 Assessment Years. 2. Absence of the assessee during the hearing. 3. Consolidation of appeals due to similar grounds. 4. Addition of unexplained cash deposits and agricultural income. 5. Relief granted by CIT(A) and appeal before ITAT. Issue 1: Correctness of CIT(A) Orders The three appeals filed by the assessee challenged the Orders dated 05.12.2017 of CIT(A)- Muzaffarnagar for the Assessment Years 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. A consolidated Order was passed due to the appeals relying on similar facts and circumstances. Issue 2: Absence of Assessee Despite multiple adjournments and written requests by the assessee, no representation was made during the hearing. Consequently, the appeals proceeded ex parte against the assessee. Issue 3: Consolidation of Appeals Since the issues raised in the appeals were based on identical grounds, a consolidated Order was deemed appropriate for the years under consideration. Issue 4: Addition of Unexplained Cash Deposits and Agricultural Income The AO made an addition of unexplained cash deposits after considering the agricultural income of the assessee. The CIT(A) granted partial relief by analyzing the business turnover and bank transactions. The AO's estimation of agricultural income and the peak credit theory were crucial in determining the unexplained cash deposits. Issue 5: Relief Granted by CIT(A) and Appeal Before ITAT The CIT(A) granted partial relief based on similar reasoning and facts in the respective years. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A) order, dismissing the appeals due to the lack of justification for modifying the order passed. In conclusion, the ITAT upheld the Orders of the CIT(A) regarding the addition of unexplained cash deposits and agricultural income, as the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence or arguments to justify further relief. The appeals were dismissed, and relief granted by the CIT(A) was upheld.
|
