9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o interference by this Court. - Decided against assessee. - CM Nos. 20803 to 05-CII of 2015, ITA No. 368 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2015 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. CM No. 20803-CII of 2015 Application is allowed and the delay of 277 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. CM No. 20804-CII of 2015 Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the deficiency in court fee has been made good, the delay, if any, be condoned. Application is allowed and the delay, if any, in making good the deficiency in court fee, is condoned. ITA No. 368 of 2015 1. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee was getting sale receipts from her boutique and was regularly depositing her saving in her bank account. During the year 2007-08, she got receipts from sale of plot as well as business operation of boutique and during September, 2007 to March, 2008, she deposited a sum of ₹ 12,12,000/- in her bank account. The assessee filed her income tax return on 31.3.2009 for the assessment year 2008-09 declaring income at ₹ 1,65,990/-. The said return was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act at the returned income and was selected for scrutiny through CASS. A notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing that the assessee had not been able to satisfactorily explain the deposit of cash on various dates. 4. After hearing learned counsel for the appellant-assessee, we do not find any merit in the appeal. 5. The assessee had derived income from running a boutique. She filed return under Section 44AF of the Act and no books of account were maintained. The Assessing Officer asked the appellant to explain the source of cash deposits of ₹ 12,12,000/- to which she submitted that the said amount was out of the sale proceeds as she had sold a piece of land in Sector 9, Ambala for a sum of ₹ 10 lacs in September, 2007 and also from the business of boutique where sales amounting to ₹ 14.50 lacs were made resulting in profit o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10 lacs vide cheque dated 14.9.2007 but she had failed to prove that the cheque was deposited by her in SBI to get the cash. Further, it was observed that the dates of deposit and the availability of cash do not tally either for sale of plot or gross receipts of boutique and the assessee had failed to explain the entries of cash deposits in her bank account. The findings recorded by the CIT(A) read thus:- 4.1 The appellant has filed a copy of sale deed of the plot (supra) dated 14.09.2007. As per this deed the appellant received ₹ 10 lacs vide cheque No. 684555 dated 14.09.2007 of State Bank of India, Ambala City. The appellant has failed to prove that the cheque was deposited by her in SBI to get the cash. Moreover, there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect and bearer of this property Shri Rajiv Kalra issued two bearer cheques No. 684557 and 684558, then how it is possible that assessee has been able to encash the cheque on 14.07.2007 itself. The sale deed is also executed on 14.09.2007 which must have taken sometime. Thereafter assessee got time to exchange the cheques. Assuming for argument sake that this is possible. Still the problem is that on 15.09.2007 the assessee has deposited ₹ 4,05,000/- only. The details of cash deposited by the assessee are as under:- 14.09.2007 4,05,000 23.10.2007 60000 27.02.2008 25000 12.3.2008 1,00,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
