9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 793X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 17,64,083/-. The ld. A.O. scrutinized the case, it is found on verification of books of accounts of the assessee that the assessee had introduced cash in its cash book on various dates against the name of various persons, to whom the assessee claimed to have issued draft. On verification of the assessee's cash book, on 23.12.2004, it was found that the assessee had introduced Rs. 5 lakhs in his cash book, but source of cash receipts were not mentioned in the cash book. The assessee produced cash cheque transfer slip during the course of hearing. But, on this slip, the name of the persons whose name deposits were made has not mentioned. The copy of cash book and deposit slip were annexed with assessment order as annexures A & B by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see's appeal. 5. Now the assessee is before us. Ld. A.R. for the assessee filed a copy of ITAT 'B' Bench, Ahmedabad, decision in ITA No. 476/Ahd/2008, A.Y. 05-06 in assessee's own case, in which the ITAT has set aside the addition made by the A.O. u/s 68 of Rs.5 lakhs for re-adjudication. The findings of ITAT 'B' Bench, Ahmedabad, is as under:- "Having heard both the sides, we have carefully gone through the orders of authorities below. It appears that vide order-sheet dated 29.03.2007, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to produce the said cash creditor. Thereafter he framed the assessment on 31.03.2007. This clearly indicates that enough time was not given to the assessee. In view of this, we set aside the order of Learned Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ive original opening cash balance for further calculations. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances. We are convinced that the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has given cogent reason for confirming working of peak credit at Rs.4,00,000/- worked by the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, decline to interfere. Resultantly, this ground of appeal is rejected." The ld. A.R. further filed copy of the assessment order u/s 143(3) read with Section 254 of the IT Act, dated 18.10.2011. The ld. A.O. had found explained Rs.5 lakhs in this order. Therefore, there was no addition on account of Rs. 5 lakhs. The ld. A.R. further relied on Ruchi Organisors (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT on agreed addition and claimed that no penalty u/s 271(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
