9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... side and it has to be reasonably reduce the disallowance sustained by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we allow 75% of the income as income derived from the said land holdings and the Assessing Officer is directed to disallow the balance 25%. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed. Addition of cash deposit with UTI Bank - HELD THAT:- If it is the withdrawal from bank account as claimed by the assessee then, the assessee should have made entry in the cash book. In the absence of suitable explanation offered by the assessee, we are inclined to accept the mere submission of assessee that it was a technical mistake. As contended by the ld. DR, on perusal of the assessment order, we find that the AO has made similar addition when the assessee has given same reply with regard to the amount deposited in the Axis Bank account and not shown in the cash book. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we sustain the addition made by the Assessing Officer and the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition of differential amount of cash deposit - HELD THAT:- On appeal, the assessee has failed to give any convincing explanation with regard to the source for .66,520/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... details. After taking into consideration the details filed by the assessee and the submissions made during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 23.12.2011 by assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.1,42,65,596/- after making various additions. 3. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising various grounds as reproduced hereinabove. Accordingly, we proceeded to adjudicate the issues as per the grounds raised by the assessee. 5. The first ground relates to restricting the claim of agricultural income at 50% of ₹.18,33,002/-. In the return of income, the assessee has claimed agricultural income at ₹.18,33,002/-. Since the assessee has not carried out any agricultural operation, the Assessing Officer treated the above income as "income from unexplained sources" and brought to tax. 5.1 On appeal, after considering the submissions of the assessee and by following the decision of Coordi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the appellate order and assessment order passed by the authorities below on this issue. When the agricultural land held by the assessee was not disputed, it cannot be held that there was no income from the above said agricultural land holdings. Since the ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance on estimated basis in the absence of material evidence for the income earned by the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that the disallowance sustained by the ld. CIT(A) is on higher side and it has to be reasonably reduce the disallowance sustained by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we allow 75% of the income of ₹.18,33,002/- as income derived from the said land holdings and the Assessing Officer is directed to disallow the balance 25%. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed. 6. The next ground raised by the assessee is with regard to sustaining the addition of cash deposit of ₹.10 lakhs. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has noticed that there was a cash deposit of ₹. 10 lakhs with UTI Bank on 11.08.2008. When the assessee was asked to explain, the assessee has submitted that the same was out of the withdrawal of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that it was a technical mistake. As contended by the ld. DR, on perusal of the assessment order, we find that the Assessing Officer has made similar addition when the assessee has given same reply with regard to the amount deposited in the Axis Bank account and not shown in the cash book. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we sustain the addition made by the Assessing Officer and the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. 7. The next ground raised in the appeal of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of differential amount of cash deposit of ₹.66,520/- on 10.05.2008. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to explain the source for the cash deposit of ₹.3,00,000/- made on 10.05.2008 with Indian Bank. The assessee has submitted that a sum of ₹.3,70,000/- was withdrawn from the cash available with his proprietary concern M/s. Abi Estates on 07.05.2008 towards expenses at Kolli Hills, where, he has agricultural lands. The assessee claimed that he received ₹.2,33,480/- towards lease amounts from agricultural lands at Kolli Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
