9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 906X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the bank account of the assessee. It is the onus upon the assessee to explain each and every transaction of the cash deposit and withdrawn. But the assessee failed to explain the same. It is also true that the entire amount of cash deposit cannot be treated as income of the assessee in a situation where there is a subsequent withdrawal and deposit in the bank account of the assessee. The amount withdrawn from the bank is available with the assessee for subsequent deposit in the bank account. In such facts and circumstances the Hon ble Courts in series of cases has held that the peak amount lying in the bank account should be treated as income of the assessee. No infirmity in the order of the authorities below. Before parting, we note that the assessee has not given his working for the amount of the peak credit. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play we are inclined to give one opportunity to the assessee to work out the peak-credit and provide the same to the AO. Ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes. Addition of low household withdrawals - HELD THAT:- It is the onus upon the assessee to furnish the necessary details as de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present case is an individual and claimed to be engaged in the business of being a small contractor of providing the Labour work. The assessee has filed the return of income declaring an income of ₹1,22,428.00 only against the turnover of ₹13,13,760.00 only. However, the assessee during the assessment proceedings failed to furnish the documentary evidences for the expenses claimed in the return of income. Thus, the AO in the absence of sufficient documentary evidences estimated the income of at Rs. 2,62,752.00 being 20% of the turnover. The AO made the addition of ₹1,40,324.00 after deducting the income disclosed by the assessee. 5. On appeal the learned CIT(A) estimated the income at the rate of 10% of the turnover. As such, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition of ₹8,948 only. 6. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The learned AR before us filed a paper book containing pages 1 to 36 and contended that there is no basis adopted by the authorities below for estimating the income at the rate of 10% of the turnover. According to the learned AR the income declared by the assessee in his retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt proceedings. Further at appellate stage also, working of peak credit has not been given by the appellant to me. In view of the discussion of the facts of the case as made in this para as well as in preceding paragraphs of this appeal order, the addition Of Rs. 31,06,594/- as made by the AO to the total income of the appellant in his assessment order is hereby confirmed u/s. 69A of the IT Act by holding that the appellant was having unaccounted and unexplained money of Rs.31,06,594/- with him and which were deposited by him in the bank accounts. At this place it is mentioned that though the AO has made the addition of Rs.31,06,594/- on account of unexplained cash deposits, but this addition is confirmed by me u/s. 69A of the Act as the appellant is found to be owner of money (i.e. cash of Rs. 31,06,594/-) on the dates on which the same were deposited in the bank and such money or cash amounts of Rs.31,06,594/- are from undisclosed sources and are unaccounted. In this regard support is drawn from the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana also as given in the case of Swam Singh Vs. CIT, Patiyala, 82 taxmann.com 213. The fact is that this addition of Rs.31,06,594/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posit does not represent the income of the assessee. According to the learned AR no addition is warranted. 16. On the contrary the learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 17. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly the huge amount of cash was deposited and withdrawn from the bank account of the assessee. It is the onus upon the assessee to explain each and every transaction of the cash deposit and withdrawn. But the assessee failed to explain the same. It is also true that the entire amount of cash deposit cannot be treated as income of the assessee in a situation where there is a subsequent withdrawal and deposit in the bank account of the assessee. In other words the amount withdrawn from the bank is available with the assessee for subsequent deposit in the bank account. In such facts and circumstances the Hon ble Courts in series of cases has held that the peak amount lying in the bank account should be treated as income of the assessee. Accordingly we note that there is no infirmity in the order of the authorities below. Before parting, we note that the assessee has not g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
