9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 of the original grounds is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. Addition u/s 68 - unexplained cash credit - HELD THAT:- The assessee has shown the unsecured loan of ₹ 2,60,000/- which means the remaining unsecured loans was repaid by the assessee. Assessee has failed to explain the source of cash credit of ₹ 8,50,000/- and repayment of the unsecured loan of ₹ 8,30,000/-. The consolidated balance-sheet as referred by the learned AR has been re-casted and filed at this stage but was not produced before the authorities below. Even the capital account balance of the assessee shown in the consolidated balance-sheet as on 31st March, 2011 is contrary to the balance-sheet of M/s Rastogi Mobile Zone wherein there is a negative capital balance. AR has submitted that the loan amount is mistakenly shown as capital balance in the consolidated balance-sheet but the same is the unsecured loan amount of ₹ 10,29,797/-. This figure alongwith the current liabilities of M/s OM Jewellers is again not matching with the unsecured loan shown by the assessee in the return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 -Therefore, the assessee has gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... competent authority as per the instruction of CBDT. So far as the admission of the additional ground is concerned, it is noted that this ground is very much raised before the CIT(A) in ground nos. 2 and 3 as under; 2. Because the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts by selecting the case for scrutiny under compulsory scrutiny criteria. There was no information nor satisfaction of the department for conducting survey and thus the entire survey proceedings is nothing but a biased action on the part of the department which is illegal and unjustified. 3. Because the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts by selecting the case for scrutiny under compulsory scrutiny criteria, as the survey proceedings was not concluded finally. Once the assessee raised this ground before the CIT(A) then even if no arguments were addressed by the assessee the CIT(A) ought to have decided this ground on merits. Therefore, it is not a fresh issue raised by the assessee but it is arising from the impugned order of the CIT(A) wherein it has disposed of this ground as under:- I have gone through the facts and the written submissions filed along with the details f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee has relied upon various decisions but the same were not relevant on this issue as the Assessing Officer has duly issued a notice under section 143(2) which is not disputed by the assessee. Even the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act despite the survey conducted under section 133A on 6.1.2012. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 142(1) of the Act on 12th September, 2012 after the expiry of the extended due date of filing of return on 31st August, 2012. Only in response to the notice under section 142(1) requiring the assessee to furnish the return the assessee filed the return of income on 24th September, 2012. The learned DR has also contended that the criteria as relied upon by the assessee for selecting the case under compulsory scrutiny is also not applicable for the return of income filed on 24.9.2012 as the said scrutiny selection criteria dated 28.02.2012 is applicable on the return of income filed prior to 1.4.2012. 6. I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. There is no dispute that there was a survey under section 133A conducted at the business premises of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee appeared alongwith the record and books of accounts and his statement was also recorded under section 131 of the Act. Therefore, apart from the statement recorded under section 133A of the Act on 6.1.2012, a statement of the assessee was also recorded under Section 131 of the Act by the Assessing Officer on 27.01.2012. It appears that there is no much gap between the survey and the post survey enquiry conducted by the Assessing Officer therefore the post survey enquiry are part and partial of the survey proceedings and would deem to be concluded on the conclusion of the post survey enquiry on 27.01.2012. Thus, when the fact of the conducting the survey as well as the post survey enquiry is not in dispute then the case of the assessee would certainly fall under the category of selection under compulsory scrutiny. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any substance or merit in the additional ground raised by the assessee. The same is dismissed. Ground no. 1 of the original grounds is general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication. 9. Ground nos. 2 to 6 are regarding the addition of ₹ 8,50,000/- made by the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. 11. On the other hand, learned DR has submitted that as per the balance-sheet of M/s Rastogi Mobile Zone as on 31st March, 2011, the capital account of the assessee is having negative of balance 60,202/- and there were unsecured loans of ₹ 10,90,000/-. Therefore, the said cash of ₹ 9,76,764/- is nothing but representing the unsecured loans and can be utilized for the payment of the unsecured loan of the close business. He has then referred to the return of income filed by the assessee and submitted that the assessee has shown an unsecured loan of ₹ 2,60,000/- as on 31st March, 2011 which shows that the remaining unsecured loan was repaid by the assessee and therefore, availability of the said cash in the hand of the assessee is not possible. He has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 12. I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer has made an addition under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credit to the tune of ₹ 8,50,000/-. There is no dispute that the assessee has shown the cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
