9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 664X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The assessee's sole substantive grievance raised in the instant lis challenges correctness of the Assessing Officer's action treating bank deposits of Rs. 60,50,000/- as unexplained cash credits in his regular assessment framed on 22.12.2016 and restricted to the extent of Rs. 42,02,365/- in the CIT(A)'s order under challenge. 3. With the able assistance of both the learned representative(s), we notice that it is not his dispute about the assessee having made cash deposits of Rs. 60.55 lakhs in issue in two accounts to the tune of Rs. 56,18,500/- and Rs. 4,31,500/- on maintained with State Bank of India and Oriental Bank of Commerce; respectively. Case records and more particularly the cash book for the period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erce a/c no 0492151001896 respectively as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. 2. The Ld. AO has carefully analysed the documents furnished and has recorded reasonable finding that there was no ATM withdrawal from Oriental Bank of Commerce and ATM withdrawal from SBI was of Rs. 12,47,635/-. The AO was found from the cash book produced that there is no independent verifiability of the cash book of M/s Aatrayee Nirman Pvt Ltd from whom the Appellant Assessee assert to have received the cash. The AO has correctly found that the company M/s Aatrayee Nirman Private Limited need not adopt cumbersome process of handing over the cash to the appellant assessee and get it deposited only for getting withdrawal which is meagre. 3. I also fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... round No.6 In this ground of appeal the Assessee had challenged the levy of interest of Rs. 12,33,837/- under section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even when there was no default of the assessee in payment of advance tax on the basis of the income declared in the return of income filed on 07.07.2014. Admittedly, the assessee did not pay any advance tax in accordance with section 210 of the Act inasmuch as there was no liability to pay advance tax on the basis of this estimated income declared in the return. Therefore the case of the Appellant does not fall under (ii) above. The Appellant's case is not covered under (i) above, as well, inasmuch as there was no liability to pay advance tax under section 208 of the Act. Had there been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000/- is addition of deem income under section 68 of the Act and that could not be said to be "current income" for the purposes of section 208 of the Act. On the facts of this case the assessee was not liable to pay any interest under section 234B of the Act. This proposition of law is well settled by jurisdictional High Court in the case of Emami Ltd. vs. CIT [2011] 12 taxmannn.com 64 (cal) and that of Karnataka High Court in the case of T.P.Indra Kumar vs. ITO [2010] 322 ITR 454 (Kar.) In the light of the submissions made hereinabove at paragraphs 1 to 16, the impugned Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer is perverse, illegal and invalid. 08. DECISION: In this smatter it is to be only observed that the levy of interest u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
