9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 1080X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing entries to various person without any documentary evidences and Book s of A/Cs, inspite once lying with the assessee to substantial any claim. 3. The undersigned craves leave to add, or alter any point. 3. In this case original return of income declaring income of ₹ 44,800/- was filed by the assessee on 19.03.2007. On receiving information that assessee was having an undisclosed bank a/c No.CD-1094 maintained with Central Bank of India, N.S.Road, Br., Kolkata since 13-09-2000 the AO had reason to believe that the transactions through the said bank a/c had not been reflected while filing the return of income for this A.Y.2006-07. Thus proceeding u/s 147 was initiated and notice u/s 148 was issued requiring the assessee to file his return of income. In compliance to the said notice the assessee filed the return of income declaring income of ₹ 2,01,263/- incorporating income under the head business profession to the tune of ₹ 1,56,463. 3.1. The assessee was asked by the A.O. to give the details of his business income, its nature, constitution etc. with trade licence. In response A.R. of the assessee filed a written submission dated Nil on 07-09-0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the other parties with whom he has entered into a transaction through his bank account CD 1094, by doing so the assessee has tried to misled the Department. Based on the above facts of the case and the available documents I hereby conclude that the assessee had an undisclosed bank account CD A/c No.1094, in Central Bank of India in which total deposit of ₹ 6,30,89,413/- out of which total cash deposit was ₹ 5,56,69,850/- (as per Annexure A) and total clearing credits was ₹ 74,19,563/- (as per Annexure B) was made during the F.Y. 2005-06. As the assessee was unable to explain and prove the sources of the above deposits the entire deposits of ₹ 6,30,89,413/- is hereby treated as his undisclosed cash credit from his undisclosed source and added to his total income for the F.Y.2005-06. 3.4. For the above conclusion the AO placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of M.Sundaram vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 287 ITR 145 (Mad) and the decision of Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT 50 ITR 1. 4. Against the above order the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee should be taxed on peak credit basis. In this regard he also referred to several ITAT s decisions which read as under :- i) ITO vs Shri Ganga Prasad Vyas vide ITA No.2069/Kol/2010 order dt.2.03.2012 ii) ITO vs Pravakar Majumder vide ITA No.459 469/Kol/2011 order dated 08.01.214. iii) ITO vs Uday Shankar Mahawar vide ITA No.1903/Kol/2009 order dated 16.07.2010 iv) ITO vs Shri Pramod T.Jariwala vide ITA No.2425/Ahd/2009 order dated 29.04.20111. v) ITO vs Shri Arun Kumar Tiwari vide ITA No.4294/Del/2010 order dated 10.06.2011. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the records. We find that in this case undisclosed bank account of the assessee was discovered. In the said account AO noted that there were deposits totaling to ₹ 6,30,89,413/-. Assessee initially submitted before the AO that the assessee was engaged in earning finance commission for providing accommodation entries to the parties. The said commission was received on an average of 0.25% towards the transactions. However, no evidence whatsoever to support the above contention was produced before AO. In these circumstances AO placed reliance upon the decision of Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one number and other particulars. No businessman would receive a sum of ₹ 2 crores without knowing the identity and address. The admitted facts were that the entire sum was credited in the bank accounts of the assessee by cash and the entire amount was in the possession of the assessee. The assessee was receiving a small amount as salary and he had not disclosed the true picture of how he came into possession of such a huge amount. Since the assessee failed to prove that the money did not belong to him, the authorities were right in assessing it under section 69A. 7.2. In the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif vs CIT reported in 50 ITR 1. The exposition of the Hon ble Apex Court is as under :- It is well established that the onus of proving the source of a sum of money found to have been received by the assessee is on him. If he disputes liability for tax, it is for him to show either that the receipt was not income or that if it was, it was exempt form taxation under the provisions of the Income-tax Act. In the absence of such proof, the Income-tax Officer is entitled to treat it as taxable income. A.GOVINDARAJULU MUDALIAR V.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX [1958] 34 ITR 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m of over ₹ 6 crores were found deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The assessee has not disclosed the same when confronted in this regard at the initial stage, he submitted before the AO that the sum was received towards providing entries for which he earned only commission. Now this submission was without any supporting evidence and despite repeated opportunities given by the AO the assessee failed to substantiate the submissions. He did not disclose from whom the money was received and to whom the same was paid. 7.5. Now before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee claimed that he should be taxed on the basis of peak credit in the account. It was submitted that no evidence has been found by the AO that assessee has utilized the withdrawal from the said account for meeting any expenditure or making any investment. The ld. CIT(A) has accepted the submission. Now we find that this is contradictory to the ratio emanating from the case laws of the Hon ble Madras High Court and Hon ble Apex Court cited above. From the case laws referred to above it is clear that where the nature and the source of the receipt cannot be satisfactorily explained by the assessee it is open to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
