9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces drawn for those years. He has to, we may though add, act in a reasonable, yet, cogent manner, taking a broad view of the matter in that the full details and evidences in respect of expenses, hitherto undisclosed, may not be forthcoming. That apart, even the assessee’s undisclosed capital, i.e., the capital deployed in the assessee’s undisclosed business, would have to be separately considered for addition. Toward this, in our view, the AO shall himself or cause the assessee to compile the consolidated balance sheet, incorporating the erstwhile undisclosed bank account also. This, on a comparison with the balance-sheet already furnished, would reveal the additional capital, so that the same, to the extent unexplained, would merit bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filing the appeal, resulting in it being deferred to the last day. We find the same reasonable. The appeal was accordingly admitted and its hearing proceeded with. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee-individual, a Thane based retailer in pharmaceuticals (by the trade name M/s. Biotrol ) was on the basis of the AIR information found to be maintaining a bank account with ICICI bank (# 021101502990), which was not disclosed per his return of income for the year, filed on 15.10.2010 at an income of ₹ 9.61 lacs (revised to ₹ 12,79,420/- on 23.11.2012). On being questioned in its respect, the assessee admitted to the said bank account being not disclosed to the Revenue, agreeing for being charged to tax on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath Prasad [1969] 72 ITR 194 (SC); 4) CIT vs. M. Ganapathi Mudaliar [1964] 53 ITR 623 (SC); 5) Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1 (SC); and 6) A. Govindarjulu Mudaliar vs. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 807 (SC). Aggrieved, the assessee is in second appeal. 4. We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. Without doubt, the burden to prove the nature and source of the credit/deposit in his bank account is on the assessee, in the absence of which the same is liable to be deemed as his unexplained income for the relevant year. Why, the onus to prove a claim which in the present case extends to proving the nexus of the withdrawals in his (ICICI) bank account with the deposits th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 lacs) in the assessee s ICICI bank account. How? Similarly, the withdrawals could also be in respect of personal expenses, or which cannot be considered as incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, or even for personal savings/investment. The assessee s personal P L account (at PB pg. 37) would therefore require being verified, both with respect to the gross profit reflected and the indirect expenditure claimed therein. This, we consider to be the principal concern or issue arising in the present case. Our preliminary examination reveals the assessee to have disclosed a gross profit at 15.25%, which compares favourably with the (pre- VAT) gross profit of 15.86% on the disclosed turnover sales of ₹ 25.15 lacs (PB pg. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s a net profit, i.e., as claimed to have been accepted by him for other years. The assessment orders for those years are not on record. The AO, where he has issued definite findings upon examination/verification, would though be obliged to take guidance from the factual findings or inferences drawn for those years. He has to, we may though add, act in a reasonable, yet, cogent manner, taking a broad view of the matter in that the full details and evidences in respect of expenses, hitherto undisclosed, may not be forthcoming. That apart, even the assessee s undisclosed capital, i.e., the capital deployed in the assessee s undisclosed business, would have to be separately considered for addition. Toward this, in our view, the AO shall hims ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
