9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O. has specifically noted that case was selected for scrutiny because assessee had deposited cash in his three Bank Accounts, but, no addition have been made on account of such amount deposited in the Bank Accounts. There was thus, no basis for the authorities below to make any addition against the assessee. The explanation of assessee has not been found to be false. Assessee, during the course of arguments rightly contended that assessee started retail business on cloth after his retirement. Since assessee is involved in small business activity and filed return of income under presumptive provisions u/s 44AD, there was no justification to consider the sales of assessee to be bogus or to make addition of cash in hand as per details sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of earlier year s income, issued show cause notice to the assessee. The assessee filed copy of the ITR for A.Y. 2015-2016 declaring income of ₹ 9 lakhs under the Head Profits and gains from Business . Further, the assessee showed cash in hand of ₹ 11,22,000/- as on 31.03.2015 in the balance sheet submitted during the course of assessment proceedings. As per assessee, he was engaged in the business of trading of cloth at a small level. The goods were procured from local market, getting some small work done on the same, and packed nicely to make them look more beautiful and wearable. They were then sold in Gurugram. The assessee submitted that he had sold goods amounting to ₹ 15,00,000/- duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because this figure has been adopted from assessee s submissions. At the most, if at all any addition is to be made, it could be made to the extent of cash in hand claimed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, held that in these circumstances the A.O. was not justified in adopting receipts of ₹ 15 lakhs to estimate the income of assessee under section 68 of the I.T. Act at ₹ 15 lakhs. The Ld. CIT(A), further made the addition of ₹ 11,22,090/- i.e., to the extent of cash in hand which was considered as unaccounted. The addition was restricted to ₹ 11,22,090/-. 4. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below. He has submitted that assessee filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in subsequent A.Y. 2016-2017, A.O. has accepted the returned income under section 143(1) in which also assessee has declared income at ₹ 9 lakhs under section 44AD of the I.T. Act. Copy of the same is filed on record. He has, therefore, submitted that there was no justification to treat cash in hand as unexplained credit. 5. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. The assessee has filed the return of income for assessment year under appeal declaring income of ₹ 9,63,920/-, out of which, income was declared at ₹ 9 lakhs under section 44AD of the I.T. Act, 1961. In subsequent A.Y. 2016-2017 also, assessee declar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n capital account of ₹ 20,28,123.75 ps. On the other side i.e., assets, assessee has shown investment, current asset, cash and bank balances, which also tally with the same amount of ₹ 20,28,123.75 ps. This figure includes cash in hand of ₹ 11,22,090/-. If the figure of ₹ 11,22,090/- is taken-out of assets side, it would not tally the balance-sheet of the assessee. It is, therefore, clear that ₹ 11,22,090/- is part of capital account of the assessee. These facts, therefore, show that there was no justification for the Ld. CIT(A) to pick-up the figure of ₹ 11,22,090/- for the purpose of making the addition on the basis of estimated balance-sheet filed at assessment stage. No evidence has been brought on re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
