9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and a common order is being disposed of for the sake of convenience as under. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal for the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2008-09 which are common for all the appeals for the A.Y. 2008-09 to 2011-12: 1. The CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer ought to have appreciated the fact that your Appellant was provided with the copies of the seized material without sufficient time to analyse and file return under section 153C, therefore assessment u1s 144 is bad in law. 2. The CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case in confirming the addition of Ps, 9,36,500/- made in assessment. 3. The CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer have erred in law and facts of the case adding Rs. 9,36,500/- being cash depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mit the information for which the assessee has not responded except submitting the copies of bank statements. Final show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 19.03.2014 for which the assessee filed reply and the same was received by the AO on 27.03.2014. From the perusal of the assessment order, there is no mention with regard to the date of requesting the seized material and supply of the seized material by the AO. The Ld.AR did not furnish the date of requisition of the copies of the seized material and the date of supply of copies of the seized material to the assessee. Having received the copies of the seized material from the AO during the assessment proceedings, at the time appeal also the assessee did not make any effort to an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 1,13,400 Total 5,48,400 Financial Year 2009-10 relevant to A.Y. 2010-11 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 10,99,000 Total 10,99,000 Financial Year 2010-11 relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 17,63,000 D.Padmalath Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 910010042334221 7,65,000 Total 25,28,000 Total Deposits for the F.Ys. 2005-06 to 2011-12 relevant to A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2012-13 51,11,900 The AO issued notices to the assessee to explain the sources of cash deposits made in the bank account. Since there was no compliance from the assessee, the AO issued the fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant seems to have been non-cooperative and evasive in providing information to the department. The undisputable fact about the case is that the appellant owns bank account in Axis Bank, Hyderabad. There is no contravening fact on the file to conclude that the cash deposits in the bank account do not belong to the appellant. The appellant's assertion that the money deposited in the bank account does not belong to him is also not supported with any corroborative evidence. Even during the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not made any attempt to explain his stand instead he took the route which is more convenient to say that the bank account do not belong to him and that they belong to Smt. Uppu Rajyalakhnii and his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount and the same against the normal practice of computing the undisclosed income. The Ld.A.R argued that the cash deposits and withdrawals are nothing but circulation of money in the same account, therefore, requested to consider the peak deposits as income instead of the entire cash deposits. The Ld.AR further submitted that the entire cash deposits were related to Shri D.Sampath which was received on behalf of Smt. U Rajya Lakshmi and Shri D.Sampath. Since his brother handled the monetary transactions of Rajya Lakshmi and due to search conducted in the premises of Smt.Rajya Lakshmi, his brother was in deep trouble and had life threat. Since the transactions have to be explained by his brother and he was running for hideout to save his l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e set aside the order of the lower authorities and remit the issue back to the file of the AO fresh consideration. Needless to say that the AO should give more opportunity to the assessee to explain the case. Accordingly. the appeals of the assessee for the A.Ys 2008-09 to 2011-12 on this ground are allowed for statistical purpose. 8. Ground No.4 is related to the contention of the assessee that the CIT(A) ought to have verified the records and the assessment order of Smt. U Rajya Lakshmi and given an opportunity to the assessee. During the appeal hearing this ground was withdrawn by the Ld.AR therefore, this ground is dismissed as withdrawn for the A.Ys.2008-09 to 2011-12. 9. Ground No.5 is related to the assessment made on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
