9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n circumstances, when appellant is unable to prove that he has conducted cheque discounting business and that too in a bank account which was not in his name and the same was revealed during survey proceedings, we are of the view that ld. CIT(A) has rightly sustained the addition by applying 10.55% net profit rate on the total turnover shown at ₹ 18,75,554/- in the bank account operated by assessee - Decided against assessee. - ITA No.1784/Ahd/2013 - - - Dated:- 1-4-2016 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, JM, Shri Manish Borad, AM For The Appellant : Shri Shailesh Vaidya, AR For The Respondent : Shri Alok Kumar, Sr.DR ORDER PER Manish Borad, Accountant Member . This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the premises of assessee and in the bank account in the name of Vishnu Kumar Agarwal turnover of ₹ 18,75,554/- was made. During assessment proceedings assessee submitted that all the transactions shown in the bank account in the name of Vishnu Kumar Agarwal relate to assessee himself and they are in relation to cheque discounting business. On the other hand, ld. Assessing Officer was of the view that turnover of ₹ 18,75,554/- does not relate to business of cheque discounting but is relating to the business of textile business of assessee and accordingly applied net profit rate of 10.55% on this turnover of ₹ 18,75,554/- and made addition of ₹ 1,97,871/- to the income of the assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer took the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l and' the turnover was related to the Cheque discounting business only. C) The learned ITO wrongly added the Net profit considering the fact that since the appellant had carried out the retail business of Cloth and showed the Net profit from the said business @ 10,55% during the year under consideration. D) The learned ITO had totally neglected the facts that the appellant had also carried out the cheque discounting business and the cheque discounting income earned during the year under consideration had also been shown in the return of income. This fact had not been controverted by the learned ITO at any time during the course of the assessment. The learned ITO had simply estimated that the income is of textile business without ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence to establish that the bank account and the transactions carried out therein were of textile business. On the contrary the appellant had filed his own affidavit and the affidavit by the said Vishnukumar Agrawal (i.e. third party) in which he confirmed that the appellant had used the said bank account for his own cheque discounting business only. I) The appellant had offered during the course of the assessment that the transactions carried out in the said bank account to be considered as that of the cheque discounting business and the Net profit rate @ 0.1% which is accepted by the ld. ITO in the case of the cheque discounting business to be applied on the turnover which would come to ₹ 1,876/- and the same to be added to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the turnover of ₹ 18,75,554/- rather than net profit rate of 10.55% applied by him relating which was hitherto shown by assessee of his textile business. 7.1 Now we are to examine whether the impugned bank account was actually used for running of textile business or running of cheque discounting business but the onus to prove the same is surely dwell upon the assessee and he has placed no material on record to prove that the transactions entered into by him in the bank account in the name of Vishnu kumar Agarwal was actually used for cheque discounting business. We further find that ld. CIT(A) has observed following while confirming the addition of ₹ 1,97,871/- made by the Assessing Officer :- 2.4 Decision : I have g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns in the bank account do not pertain to the cheque discounting business being carried out by the appellant. Hence, the AO's action in adopting the GP rate of 10.55% disclosed by the appellant in his other trading business to work out the profit from the transactions done through this bank account is upheld. Hence the addition of ₹ 1,97,871/-- made by the AO is sustained. This ground of appeal is dismissed. 8. From going through the observations of the ld. CIT(A) and also looking to the impugned bank account placed on record, we find that ld. CIT(A) has rightly observed that the transactions in the bank account do not pertain to the cheque discounting business being carried out by the appellant; as we also find that assessee is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
