9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 787X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f banana nor he could give any details of the transporters through which these bananas were supplied to the traders - No details/vouchers in this respect were furnished by the assessee at any stages including during the hearing of appeal. When AO proposed to add net profit @ 10% of the total sales, assessee took the plea that all the transactions were done by the assessee on behalf of HUF and in support of certain documents were also filed - AO also found that neither the HUF nor any member of HUF obtained PAN No. and were not assessed to tax - CIT(A) has also agreed with the finding of AO that cash deposit in the undisclosed bank account was out of trading of bananas - He reduced the estimation of profit from 10% taken by the AO to 6% - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed by learned CIT(A) deserves to be deleted. 4. That during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted documentary evidences that only 1% service charges was received by the appellant from farmers, however, against it, without any material or evidence, the learned CIT(A) has directed to assess 6% income on total amount of bananas including its own deserves to be deleted. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned A.O. has taxed ancestral agricultural income of appellant in his individual case @10% and reduced by learned CIT(A) @ 6% which is exempt U/s 10(1) of the l.T Act 1961. However, his own banana crop was also considered in service charges which deserved to be delet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 905/- Commission @ 1% Rs. 40,594/- Total Rs. 40,33,500/- Rs. 40,33,500/- Assessee also furnished the details of purchases. On perusal of the same, it was revealed that purchases included assessee s own banana worth Rs. 4,50,763/-. However assessee did not declare the same in his return of income being agricultural income. Further the assessee stated that the entire sales consideration of banana was deposited by the traders in his saving bank account with Punjab National Bank by cash. Thereafter the assessee was withdrawing the money from his bank account and disbursing the same to the farmers. The assessee also stated that he was getting commission @ 1% from the trading of bana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or any further verification. Since the assessee failed to comply with the information/details, the assessee was asked to show cause as to why the commission @ 1% offered for taxation on this business should not be rejected and to explain as to why net profit @ 10% should not be added to the total income out of this business. The assessee was also asked to show as to why undisclosed agricultural income of Rs. 4,50,763/- should not be added to his total income. In response, the assessee vide his letter dated 05/11/2011 along with the declaration in stamp paper stated as under:- Our HUF consisted of following members and the details of family members are as under:- 1. Shatabhai Rachhodbhaii Patel HUF 2. Bhaveshbhai Satabhai Patel aged a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I have paid an amount of Rs.39,58,501/- to the 5 parties whose banana have sold through me on commission basis. I have not purchased or sold any goods of my relatives nearby through owner of agriculture lands and through agent of Punjab during the Accounting years 1/4/2008 to 31/03/2009. Our HUF is having no taxable income and as such no return of income was filed by us and as such I strongly object for taxing net profit @10% in my individual assessment. However the above contention of the assessee was not found acceptable by the AO in view of the fact that the assessee initially vide his statement dated 27-11-2011 has offered 1% of his banana business in addition to salary income and income from transporter carriage business. Further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fit @ 10% as reasonable profit on this business. The profit so worked out was Rs. 4,03,350/- and was added to the total income of the assessee. 4. In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) after taking into consideration the submission of the assessee which have been reproduced by him in his order reduced this estimation of profit to 6% of total sales turn over. 5. Further aggrieved now the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. At the time of hearing learned counsel of the assessee reiterated the same submissions as made before lower authorities and took us to several pages of paper book in support of his submission. Ld. DR relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A). 7. After hearing both the parties and perusing the record, we find that there is no dispute ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
