9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, doing business in wholesale medical agency, e-filed his return of income of Rs. 2,94,190/- along with audit report u/s 44AB of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and it was observed by the department that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 1,24,01,841/- and Rs. 78,68,800/- in his bank accounts. A series of notices were issued to the assessee calling for sources for cash deposits and to produce books of account to verify the sources for cash deposits, but the assessee did not comply with any of these notices. Hence, the Assessing Officer (AO) treated the amount as business income and considering profit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooks of account and audit report as per provisions of section 44AB of I.T.Act, more particularly gross receipts accepted from same books of account and no adverse inference with regard to expenditure claimed. Without prejudice to the above, in the alternative. 4. In the facts and circumstances of appellants case, the estimation of income on gross receipts @8% by Assessing Officer and upheld by the Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Centre is very high and while upholding estimate @8%, the CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the learned assessing officer has not brought any comparable cases in the line of business with such high rate of profit, to ignore income returned by appellant supported by audited books of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities and estimate the income on gross receipts @2% in view of the principles of natural justice. 7. Per contra, the Ld.DR relied on the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 8. I have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. It is undisputed fact that notices were issued on the assessee, but the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the department. Hence, the assessee's case was dismissed ex-parte by the lower authorities. However, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has no knowledge of the notices said to be issued for the fact that the assessee's business is closed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
