9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 860X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the submissions and perused the material available on record, I find that the Ld. CIT(A) in the order passed has been more than fair.There is no argument, evidence or fact on record justifying any further relief. Accordingly the grounds raised for want of any justification for modifying the order passed are rejected. The finding under challenge is upheld. Said Order was pronounced on the open Court at the time of hearing itself. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA Nos.:- 2107, 2111 & 2112/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 25-6-2019 - Smt. Diva Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None. For the Revenue : Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considering the record, the submissions of the ld. Sr. DR were found correct on merits. 4. Accordingly, for ready reference the grounds from ITA 2107/Del/2018 are being reproduced hereunder: 1. The Ld CIT(A) has wrongly confirmed the agriculture income of ₹ 325000/- only assumed by the Ld ITO despite submission of arguments and material of higher agriculture income by the appellant and the Ld ITO having not brought out any material whatsoever of his assumption of agriculture income. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) have grossly erred on facts and law in confirming an addition of ₹ 6,25,343/- to the income of the appellant as unexplained cash deposits in the Bank Account under section 69 A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n response to notice u/s 148 of the assessee has not shown any income under the head agricultural income, whereas he is stating that his total source of income is from agriculture. Therefore, even if the contention of the assessed is accepted that he is enjoying agriculture income, the same is taken of ₹ 3,25,000/- and after deducting ₹ 3,25,000/- from total deposited the balance amount of ₹ 3201150/- remains unexplained case deposits as the onus lies on the assessed to prove the capacity and genuineness of the transaction. Reliance is placed on Manoj Aggarwal VS DCIT (ITAT, SB Del) 113 ITD 377 and VIT VS K. Chinnathamban (S.C.) 292 ITR 682. 6. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A) w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se and material on record it is noted that there are frequent cash deposits/cash withdrawals in both the bank accounts of the appellant. The appellant has shown business turnover of ₹ 25,20,000/- in the return of income on which income of ₹ 2,02,000/- has been shown u/s 44AD of the Act. The AO has not disputed these facts. From these facts it can be logically inferred that amount of ₹ 35.26,150/- deposited in the bank accounts of the appellant was on account of business receipts of the appellant. There are frequent cash deposits and withdrawals in the bank accounts of the appellant. In these circumstances peak credit theory should have been applied by the AO to compute the income out of transactions recorded in the bank st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustifying any further relief. Accordingly the grounds raised for want of any justification for modifying the order passed are rejected. The finding under challenge is upheld. Said Order was pronounced on the open Court at the time of hearing itself. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 11. A perusal of facts in ITA No. 2111/Del/2018 show that in the facts of the present case also the assessee had returned an income of ₹ 1,27,300/- pursuant to notice u/s 148 of IT Act. The deposits of ₹ 35,73,000/- in the same saving bank accounts maintained with State Bank of India and Punjab National Bank were required to be explained. 12. Similarly, in I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
