9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and source of cash deposit which is against the principle of preponderance of probability. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned CIT (A)-1 Chandigarh has erred in law and facts in upholding the contention of the learned AO by treating information received through AIR transaction as valid evidence and not verifying the same from the Bank before recording of the reasons and before completion of assessment. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned CIT (A)-1 Chandigarh has erred in law and facts in upholding that the learned A.O. has recorded valid reasons to believe inspite of the fact that they are based on invalid notices and treating cash deposit as income under section 2(24) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s remand report on the same. The A.O. commented as under: b) Comments of additional evidence u/s. 46A(3) The assessee's contention that he was prevented by sufficient cause from providing the information/documents since he was out of India for the period w.e.f. 18.07.2017 to 05.12.2017 is not correct. As already discussed above, the assessee had refused to accept the notice dated 31.03.2019 issued u/s. 148 of the Act and had not filed any return of income in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued to the assessee on 29.05.2017 and the case was fixed for hearing on 10.06.2017. The assessee neither attended the assessment proceeding nor file any reply. The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Sh. R.K. Chopra for AY 2009-10 & 2010-11. AR submitted the same during remand proceedings. Hence, objection of lack of opportunity becomes infructuous. During appellate proceedings, appellant argued that cash was deposited in his bank account out of cash withdrawn by his father from his bank account. On perusal of Bank Statement of Sh. Greesh Chander-the appellant and his father Sh. R.K. Chopra, it is observed that cash deposit entries in the account of assessee totaling to the tune of Rs. 12,40,000/- were reflecting in various intervals starting from 02.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. However, the withdrawal entry to the tune of Rs. 23,00,000/- reflecting in the account of Sh. R.K. Chopra (father of the assessee) was made through cheque in singl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the record. In the present case it is noticed that the A.O. framed the assessment ex parte and made the addition of Rs. 13,50,500/- which was the amount deposited by the assessee in his saving bank account. Since the assessment order was passed by the A.O. ex parte, the assessee furnished the additional evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) who admitted the same. However the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition by observing that the assessee had not brought any evidence on record to authenticate his claim that the cash deposited in his bank account was out of the withdrawal/adjustment of cash from his father's bank account. On the contrary the claim of the assessee was that the cash was deposited in his bank account out of cash withdrawn by his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
