9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RI RAJPAL YADAV , VICE PRESIDENT Appellant by : None ( Written submission ) Respondent by: Shri V. K. Singh , Sr. DR ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Ahmedabad ['CIT(A)' in short] vide order in CIT(A)-4/10559/2018-19 dated 01/10/2019 passed for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of AO made addition to tune of ₹ 29,41,794/- as 1% of Total Transaction on Non Speculative Business of ₹ 29,41,79,375/- without giving effect of the gross purchase of the share transaction, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amed the assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. Further, the assessee has not co-operated with the Department, the Assessing Officer estimated the profit on Share Commodity Transaction amounting to ₹ 29,41,79,375/- at 1% which is found to be reasonable and demanded a tax thereon. 5. Aggrieved against the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A)-4, Ahmedabad challenging the ex-parte order. After considering the reply given by the assessee's representative, the Ld. CIT(A) held as follows: The appellant was given a notice of enhancement of assessment enhancing the income from ₹ 29,41,790/- to ₹ 41,30,000/- on 16.09.2019. The appellant attended and filed the explanation as under: That ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odity transactions is not permissible as per law. The fact remains that the appellant has introduced cash in the system for which self serving statements are being made. Technically, the cash is in the bank account of Kalabhai therefore, the total cash of ₹ 41,30,000/- cannot be taxed in the hands of appellant. In the circumstances and as per facts of the case it is felt that the addition made by AO is on estimation basis and the same is within parameters upheld by various courts. In the circumstances, a benefit of doubt is given to the appellant and an addition of ₹ 29,41,790/- is upheld with the comment that the appellant has introduced unexplained cash to the extent of ₹ 29,41,790/-. The ground Nos. 1 2 of appeal are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
