9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther case laws. Thus we uphold this finding. On the alternative plea of the assessee that, only the peak credit in this account has to be added, we are of the considered opinion that this plea is justified. Consistent with the view taken therein, we set aside the matter to the file of the A.O. with a specific direction that only the peak credit in this bank account should be brought to tax. - ITA No. 135/Del/2014 - - - Dated:- 10-8-2016 - SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Kapil Goel, Adv. For The Respondent : Sh. F.R.Meena, Sr.D.R. ORDER PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t from the fact that: a. amount involved is not substantial and b. magnitude/frequency of cash deposits have sufficient nexus with assessee s business (in figures of 10,000 and 12,000 etc) ; c. In (AY 2009-10) same plea on identical facts is accepted by Ld AO u/s 143(3) assessment ; d. it is difficult to presage that assessee can provide full fledged vouchers/details/audit trail for unaccounted business activity/sales ; e. Ld AO has himself observed at para 17.6(B) and para 17.8 that cash deposits represent profit element in unaccounted business activity; f. Assessee has no other source of business and no unaccounted asset/investment parallel to alleged income is there; g. Even under search penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law the Ld CIT-A erred in confirming the addition of 299,232 on a/c of alleged unaccounted house hold expenses on mere basis of current level of inflation and perception for expenditure required on day to day running of house without anything more. Relief Claimed i) To delete the addition of ₹ 44,76,800 and direction to be assessed as per reasonable profit rate application or any lump sum addition and/ or peak theory; ii) To hold CIT-A gave perverse findings dehors the material on record and ignored relevant material; iii) To delete the wrongful addition for alleged house hold expenses of ₹ 299,232/ -. iv) Any other relief as deemed fit and appropriate in facts and circumstances of the case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the claim that the cash deposits represented sales were filed by the assessee. As detailed in the assessment order, ample opportunities were provided to the assessee to produce the details as required by the AO to finalise the assessment and to verify the claim of the assessee. However, no such details were furnished. Further the claim of the assessee to revise his return was also rejected as the original returns have been filed muchbeyond time on 6.7.2011. In the absence of supporting documents and on the basis of detailed reasons in the assessment order the A.O. made an addition of ₹ 44,76,800/- as unaccounted income of the assessee u/s 69A. The assessee filed letter dt. 21.8.2013 along with a copy of affidavit stating the n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Valley Promoters vs. CIT 305 ITR 202 and other case laws. Thus we uphold this finding. 4. On the alternative plea of the assessee that, only the peak credit in this account has to be added, we are of the considered opinion that this plea is justified. The assessee has rightly relied on the decision of the ITAT Delhi F Bench in ITA 2906/Del/13 for the A.Y. 2009-10 order dt. 27.3.2015 wherein at para 4 it was held as follows. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The only dispute in this appeal is against the addition made by the Assessing Officer towards certain deposits made in two bank accounts maintained by the assessee, totaling ₹ 45.50 lakhs. The assessee furnished cash flow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
