9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding that although assessee claimed that source for cash deposits is out of cash received from M/s.Saravana Global Holdings Ltd., but account statement of assessee does not vouch the same, whereas the assessee claims that source for three cash deposits was from M/s. Saravana Global Holdings Ltd., for which account statement of the party has been furnished before the AO. Facts are not clear insofar as source of income for cash deposits. Therefore issue needs to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer in light of account statement furnished by the assessee to explain source for three cash credits found on three dates . Interest on fixed deposits - Assessing Officer during the remand proceedings observed that the assessee has received interest income on fixed deposits and credited in the same bank account . However, on perusal of return of income filed for the year, the same was not offered for taxation. Therefore, we are of the considered view that this issue also needs verification by the Assessing Officer. - I.T.A. No. 696 & 697/Chny/2018 - - - Dated:- 31-12-2020 - SHRI V.DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant by : Mr. R.Mee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Promy Kuriakose 386 ITR 597 and also the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Refam Management Services Private Limited 386 ITR 693 (Del.) as also the decision of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Renu Constructions Private Limited 399 ITR 262 and Canyon Financial Services Limited vs. Income Tax Officer 399 ITR 202 (Del.). Reliance is also placed upon decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Singad Technical Education Society (SC) 397 ITR 344 affirming the decision of the Bombay High Court in 378 ITR 84 (Bom.) as also the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Kamaleshbhai Dharamshibhai Patel which has been approved by the Supreme Court. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have found that in the present case the enhancement made by him to the extent of ₹ 15,000/- and ₹ 47,053/- is not on the basis of any material seized during the search nor on the basis of any satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over the party subjected to the search and consequently the assumption u/s.153C for enhancing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assumptions and presumptions and that too, in a proceeding u/s. 153C of the Act . For these reasons and for any other reason that may be adduced at the time of hearing, the appellant prays that the Hon ble Tribunal nay be pleased to set aside the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19 dated 12-12-2017 and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the additions made and render justice. 3. At the outset, learned AR for the assessee submitted that the appeals filed by the assessee is time barred by 14 days for which necessary petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay has been filed. The AR further submitted that the assessee could not file appeals within the time allowed under the Act, due to the fact that appeal papers received from tax consultant were mixed up with other papers which caused delay of 14 days. The delay in filing appeals is neither intentional nor willful but for the unavoidable reasons, therefore, delay may be condoned in the interest of advancement of substantial justice. 4. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposing condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee submitted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lable according to balance sheet. Penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)(c) of I.T.Act,1961 for non-compliance to notice u/s.142(1) of the Act are also initiated. 7. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(A). Before the learned CIT(A), assessee has challenged additions made by the Assessing Officer towards credits found in bank account as unexplained cash credit on peak credit basis. The assessee has also filed petition for admission of additional grounds along with certain documents including financial statement for the relevant assessment year. The additional grounds filed by the assessee have been forwarded to the Assessing Officer for remand report. The Assessing Officer vide remand report commented on additional evidences filed by the assessee and has accepted the source for credits found in bank account to the extent of ₹ 8,90,00,000/-. However, the Assessing Officer has further noted that there are three credits of ₹ 5,000/- each on 28.08.2006, 28.09.2006 and 09.10.2006 respectively in the above said bank account for which no satisfactory explanation including source has been filed by the assessee. The Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso relied upon judgement of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Singad Technical Education Society reported in 397 ITR 344. 10. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly supporting the order of learned CIT(A) submitted that assessee has taken legal ground challenging additions made towards cash deposits and interest income without any reference to seized materials found at the time of search in the assessments for the first time before the Tribunal and further additions made by the Assessing Officer towards cash deposits was on the basis of same bank account which was subject matter of consideration before learned CIT(A) . Since the assessee has not taken any ground challenging additions before the learned CIT(A) on the basis of same bank account, then it cannot take a new ground challenging enhancement made by the learned CIT(A) on the basis of same bank account. 11. We have heard rival contentions of both sides, perused materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below along with case laws cited by counsel for the assessee. As regards legal ground taken by assessee challenging enhancement of assessment towards cash credit of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be re-examined by the Assessing Officer in light of account statement furnished by the assessee to explain source for three cash credits found on three dates . Insofar as interest on fixed deposits of ₹ 47,053/-, Assessing Officer during the remand proceedings observed that the assessee has received interest income on fixed deposits and credited in the same bank account . However, on perusal of return of income filed for the year, the same was not offered for taxation. Therefore, we are of the considered view that this issue also needs verification by the Assessing Officer in light of return of income filed by the assessee for relevant assessment year. In case, interest earned on fixed deposits was not offered to tax, then enhancement made by the learned CIT(A) towards interest income survives. 13. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.697/Chny/2018 (A.Y.2013-14): 14. The facts and issues involved in this appeal are identical to the facts and issues considered by us in ITA No.696/Chny/2018 for the assessment year 2007-08. The reasons given by us in preceding paragraph shall mutatis mutandis applies to this app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
