9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 282X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt in Warana Sahakari Bank Ltd. is undisclosed. 2. Because, the CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the appellant's contention that the deposits in the A/c No. 443 has been made out of withdrawals from the same account as well as realization of old debts and cash held in hand. 3. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in adopting the peak theory for the purpose of making an addition to the returned income of the appellant and erroneously working out a peak of Rs.16,56,000/- 4. Because, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in enhancing the income of the appellant by adding Rs.1,21,21,600/- on account of sale of land as income from other sources even though the land in qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us. 3. The Ld.Counsel referred to the facts of the case, the paper book filed in this regard containing pages 103 therein submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) not only erred in enhancing the income but also wrongly determined the peak credit. Referring to the rectification petition filed before the CIT(A) dated 16.03.2012, it was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) gave different amounts in the various notices issued and ultimately arrived at the peak credit of Rs.16,56,000/- as on 26.12.2007 which included the highest credit in which an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- was transferred from another saving banks account. It was submitted that calculation of peak is wholly erroneous. Having accepted the credits of Ms Shweta Patel who is a co-owner, the working o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is property was ultimately sold vide a sale deed dated 15.10.2011 to one M/s Chaddha Group and assessee was offered the income offering the same in AY 2010-11, therefore CIT Appeals was wrong in considering the income as brokerage income while enhancing the same. 4. The Ld. DR, however, relied on the orders of the Authorities. 5. We have considered the issue. We are unable to agree with the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the orders of the CIT(A). Assessee has been filing returns of the commission income in various years and has been enclosing various statements of accounts to the returns filed in earlier years. Just because the assessee has claimed benefit of provisions of Sec.44AD in some years as " no Accounts case", it does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... translation. Be that as it may, as seen from the documents and the submissions, there is no doubt about the error committed by the Ld CIT(A) in enhancing the income. First of all the Assessing Officer has not made any addition on the land transactions. Second, the assessee did enter into the agreement for purchase of land on 20.08.2007 for a value of Rs. 8,60,000/- there seems to be some transactions with one Ms. Shweta Patel which were not examined by the AO at all. On record, there was evidence of purchase of the said property by the assessee along with co-owner on 30.07.2008. There was an agreement of sale during the year and some amounts have been received. some of them were deposited in Ms. Shweta's Account as explained by the Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
