9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 484X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment year amounting to Rs. 1,86,88,590/-. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the AO on the basis of the information received from the office of the DDIT (Inv) that the assessee has taken accommodation entries from certain parties to inflate his profit reopened the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. It was also stated that in the reasons recorded that an enquiry under section 133(6) was made by the Investigation Wing on 23.01.2013 in connection with the hawala entries obtained by the assessee. The peak credits were worked by the DDIT (Inv) at Rs. 7,51,39,528/-, Rs. 8,51,46,118/- and Rs. 7,03,53,023/- for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12, respectively. However, independent enquiries init ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hases from eight parties which remained to be considered in the peak worked out during the course of the enquiry conducted by the DDIT aggregating to Rs. 5,07,60,613/-. The ledger accounts were merged into a single account and the combined peak amount of credit after adding the purchases and deducting the payments made was worked out. On this basis the peak credit in respect of assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 was worked out as under: - Financial Year Peak credit as per details filed during assessment proceedings Incremental credit (Rs. ) 2008-09 7,58,23,848/- 7,58,23,848/- 2009-10 10,47,43,397/- 2,89,19,549/- 2010-11 8,17,90,409/- Nil The AO, therefore, added a sum of Rs. 7,58,23,848/- in the impugned assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ills taken. The AO has done exactly the same. In fact the peak working is annexed to the assessment order. I find the same in order and therefore confirm the finding of the AO. The appellant during the hearing on 25/02/2016 made an alternate plea that while considering the working of peak credit, the peak of the earlier year i.e. A.Y. 2008-09 also needs to be given credit for as the purchases are made from same hawala dealers in earlier years also. I find that the AO has not given credit for the unaccounted cash at the beginning of the year to the appellant. I am inclined to agree with the alternate plea of the appellant simply because the appellant has unaccounted case pertaining to the earlier year in his hands as on 01/04/2008 (1st day o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e party we noted that the AO while working out the incremental credit for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 in the aforesaid assessment year itself has allowed the credit for the preceding assessment year. Since in the impugned assessment year the AO has not considered the peak credit of A.Y. 2008-09 and taken A.Y. 2009-10 peak as first year, therefore the AO has in our view has committed a mistake. The method of computation of peak credit had even been accepted by the AO while working out the peak credit for subsequent assessment years which is apparent from para 4.1.20 of the assessment order. In view of this fact we do not find any illegality of infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) directing the AO to allow the credit for the peak of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
