9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 948X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessee accordingly. As the appellant has completely failed to give any satisfactory reply about the proof of the nature of his business, therefore, AO had no other option but made an addition and the same was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) also. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, we note that conclusion arrived by the ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference therefore, we confirmed the orders of ld. CIT(A) and accordingly dismiss the grounds raised by the appellant. - ITA Nos. 228 & 229/Kol/2020 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2022 - SHRI MANISH BORAD , HON BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA , HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Pradip Biswas , ACIT ORDER PER SONJ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come is absolutely unwarranted and stands to no reason at all. 2. FOR THAT on the facts both the authorities below erred both in points in law and on facts. 3. FOR THAT the appellant craves leave to take further and/or additional grounds at the time or before hearing of this appeal petition if necessary. 2. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. On perusal of the records shows that a number of opportunities have been given to the assessee but there is no compliance. It seems that the assessee is not interested to pursue the appeal and, therefore, we decide to adjudicate the appeals with the assistance of ld. DR and the available records. 3. The assessee is an individual and did not file a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. In the case of CIT vs. M/s JRD Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.544/2005, the Hon ble Delhi High Court pronounced on 12/09/2018 that the peak credit worked out by the assessee was on the basis that the principle of peak credit would apply, notwithstanding the failure of the assessee to explain each of the sources of the deposits and the corresponding destination of the payment without squaring them off, which is not permissible in law. The Hon ble Delhi High Court held that ITAT cannot proceed merely on the basis of accountancy, overlooking the settled legal position that peak credit is not applicable where deposits remain unexplained under section 68 of the Act. The plea of the appellant that he should be taxed only o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this regard. The claim of the appellant that the peak credit would apply notwithstanding the fact that the appellant has not explained the source of each of the sources of the deposits and the corresponding destination of the payment without squaring them off is not permissible in law as explained by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR38 (AIL). 5.8 Thus, the question whether only the peak could be added or not is ultimately not one of theory or a question of law, but one of fact in each case. During the course of assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings, inspite of repeated opportunities, no bills/vouchers relating to sales and purchases, purchase and sale ledg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of accountancy. The premise underlying the concept of peak credit is the squaring up of the deposits in the account with the corresponding payments out of the account to the same person. 5.6 In the case of Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 38 (All.), the Allahabad High Court explained that benefit of peak can be given only when the assessee owns up all the cash credits in the books of accounts. It was further held: For adjudicating upon the plea of peak credit the factual foundation has to be laid by the assessee. He has to own all cash credit entries in the books of account and only thereafter can the question of peak credit can be raised. 5.7 Therefore, in order to avail the benefit of the peak credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O. has in the present facts and circumstances has estimated the income by adopting net profit of 8% on the total deposits of Rs. 2,35,51,338/- and estimated the business income of Rs. 18,84,107/-. 5.9 As the appellant has failed to give any satisfactory reply about the proof of the nature of his business, the addition of Rs. 17,45,463/- made by the A.O. is confirmed, the Ground of Appeal is dismissed. 5.10 In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 5. However, on perusal of impugned orders, we find that the assessee was unable to furnish any necessary details in support of its grounds of appeals raised before the ld. CIT(A) and in absence of the details, the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal against the assessee. Aggrieved by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
