9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing of the assessment without specifying as to how the reopening is invalid. Therefore, the objection of the assessee or devoid of any merits or substance and the same are dismissed. Addition on account of cash deposit made in the bank account by assessee as well as the estimation of income on the transactions carried out with the Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) - HELD THAT:- The details of the cash deposit made on various dates has been given by Assessing Officer of the assessment order. The assessee has not disputed the dates and amount of deposits extracted in the table reproduced by AO in the assessment order. In the absence of any explanation regarding source of these deposits, the Assessing Officer has rightly made the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... None appeared on behalf of the assessee till the matter was taken up at the end of board. The hearing of the matter has been adjourned from time to time either due to none representation of the assessee or on the request of the assessee. On last seven occasion, the hearing of the case was adjourned due to non availability of the assessee and request of the assessee through application. On the last date of hearing i.e. 5th July 2021, the hearing was again adjourned at the request of the assessee and last opportunity was granted. Despite the last opportunity granted to the assesse neither anybody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjourned application is filed. Accordingly, the appeal was taken up for hearing and adjudication expart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of sums aggregating to ₹ 43,87,320/- in the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the act. 6. BECAUSE in view of the aforesaid ground no. 5 above, the entire withdrawal and deposit in the said bank account should be accessible in the hands of the person upon whom the appellant for his livelihood. 7. BECAUSE for the ground n.o. 5 6 above, the appellant was prevented from appearing and representing the facts of his case before the Assessing Officer, so due alleged non-compliance an exparte order was passed by Assessing Officer and a huge addition of ₹ 43,87,320/- was made in his hand. 8. BECAUSE sum aggregating to ₹ 19,66,687/- forms part of the alleged deposits in bank account, ownership of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o question of none service of the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. He has further contended in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee has not filed any return of income. Even the assessee has not responded to the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act issued by Assessing Officer repeatedly. The requisite information called by Assessing Officer has not been furnished by assessee. Neither requisite details nor books of accounts were produced by assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. Consequential, the Assessing Officer has made addition of ₹ 42,29,985/- on account of unexplained deposit in the bank account as well as ₹ 1,57,335/- towards income from transactions carried out by assessee on Multi Commodity Ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce in the objection of the assessee raised in the ground nos. 1 to 3. The assessee has just raised the objection against reopening of the assessment without specifying as to how the reopening is invalid. Therefore, the objection of the assessee or devoid of any merits or substance and the same are dismissed. 6. The ground nos. 4 to 10 are regarding addition made by Assessing Officer on account of cash deposit made in the bank account by assessee as well as the estimation of income on the transactions carried out with the Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX). The assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w. 144 of the Act. The Assessing Officer has issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ried out on Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) it is noted that the CIT(A) has restricted the said addition by applying profit rate @ 1% as against 8% applied by Assessing Office. The CIT(A) has sustained the addition on this account only to the extent of ₹ 19,667/- as against ₹ 1,57,335/- estimated by Assessing Officer. The assessee has not filed any details or record to controvert the fact that he has carried out the transactions on Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX). The estimation of income by CIT(A) by applying net profit at 1% is just and proper. Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. ( Order pronounced on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
