9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of her husband, therefore, there is nothing wrong in the orders of the authorities below in making and confirming the addition. Ground of appeal of assessee is dismissed. Unexplained deposit in the bank account - Addition on account of FDRs and interest on the said FDRs - Held that:- Detailed information should have been obtained from the Bank as to who has opened this Bank Account with all the documents and all the documents should be confronted to the assessee. The statement of the Bank Manager should be recorded for verification of the facts along with KYC details available with the Bank. Similarly, as regards FDRs, the assessee explained that there may be a wrong information mentioning the name of Shri Ranjit Kumar Propr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee was that appeal is dispatched through post within time and pleaded that the nominal delay of 04 days in filing the appeal, be condoned. In view of these facts and explanation of assessee, delay in filing appeal is condoned. 5. On ground No.1, assessee challenged the order of the authority below contending that no proper opportunity of being heard provided to her Counsel because of his illness. However, the impugned order shows that in response to the notice of the Ld. CIT(A), the Learned Counsel for the Assessee, appeared before him and filed the written submissions and he argued the appeal. In the written submissions no such point has been raised. Therefore, it is clear that proper opportunity has been given by Ld. CIT(A) before p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, addition may be deleted. The Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the contention of the assessee because the assessee did not produce bills and vouchers even during the course of appellate proceedings. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the books of account under section 145(3) of the I.T. Act. It was also noted that in the case of Shri Vijay Kumar Kushwaha the GP rate @ 6.69% and NP rate @ 2.12% on turnover of ₹ 3.42 crores as against GP on ₹ 3.18 crores, NP @ 2.10% on turnover of ₹ 4.12 crores by the assessee. The appeal of assessee on this ground was accordingly dismissed. The assessee in the written submissions reiterated the same facts. 7. Considering the facts of the case in the light of findings of the authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account copy of U.K. I.T. Service and Trading Company A/c. No.0471083000000009 ( ii) Account copy of Mrs. Rekha Kushwaha (assessee) A/c.No. 0471053000001220 ( iii) Account copy of Mr. Vijay Kushwaha and Mrs. Rekha Kushwaha Joint A/c. No.0471053000001241. 9.1. On perusal of the cash credit account from the copy of M/s. Uttarakhand I.T. Services and Trading Company A/c. No.xxx09, it was found that assessee has not shown this account in her balance sheet and has deposited cash on different dates amounting to ₹ 89,000. The explanation of assessee was called for, in which, she has explained that this account does not pertain to the assessee. Rather CC.No.04710800000010 is her proprietary-ship. The submission of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no entry of ₹ 12.50 lakhs in the ledger. In the absence of satisfactory explanation of assessee, A.O. made addition of ₹ 12,50,000. Similarly, interest on this FDRs of ₹ 3,728 was added to the income of the assessee. 10. The assessee challenged all the three additions before the Ld. CIT(A) and it was explained that A/c. No.xxx09 belongs to the husband of the assessee and her A/c. No. is xxx10. It was a proprietary concern of M/s. Vijay Kumar Kushwaha which was later on changed to the assessee in the name of the Firm. The Bank has supplied wrong information. The details from KYC may be called for from the Bank to clarify the position and to verify who is the proprietor of this account. Similarly, as regards FDRs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the name of the Firm without giving details of the person who is holding the account. It is also submitted in the written submissions that dispute is going on between the assessee and South Indian Bank. Therefore, wrong information have been provided. As regards FDRs of ₹ 12.50 lakhs, the details are also filed with the written submissions to show that FDRs of ₹ 70 lakhs was purchased on three dates. Copy of the audited accounts is also filed to show that FDRs of ₹ 70 lakhs with Oriental Bank of Commerce have been disclosed in the balance sheet of the assessee. The A.O. however, made only addition of ₹ 12.50 lakhs. The assessee explained that due to wrong information, this addition have been made. It is also explain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
