9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account of cash deposit which it chose to scale down to Rs. 2,50,000/- from Rs. 5,82,385/-. Question of law, as framed, must be answered in favour of the appellant/assessee for statistical purposes. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA For the Appellant Through: Appellant-in-person along with Mr Jayant Tripathi and Mr Sarfaraz Ahmed, Advs. For the Respondent Through: Mr Kunal Sharma, Sr Standing Counsel with Ms Zehra Khan, Standing Counsel along with Mr Shubhendu Bhattacharyya, Adv. RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL): 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. According to us, the appeal deserves to be admitted. 2.1 It is ordered accordingly. Resultantly, the following question of law is framed for consideration: (i) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, Tribunal ] misdirected itself on facts and in law, in directing the addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- on the ground that is represented unexplained cash deposit, without having regard to the loss suffered by the appellant/assessee while trading in equities and commodities? 3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erative part of the said assessment order reads as follows: 4. As per ITS information received from ITD system, the assessee has cash deposited in his saving bank account amounting to Rs. 10,51,885/- (There are multi cash credit entries found in his bank statement) during the F.Y. 2010-11. On perusal of reply of the assessee it is cleared that the assessee had received amounting to Rs. 3,19,500/- as gift from his parents and Rs. 1,50,000/- as saving from his past job in Religare Securities Ltd, Bahadurgarh, Haryana. In this regard the assessee has submitted on oath affidavits which is perused and placed on record. Therefore, amount of Rs. 4,69,500/- out of Rs. 10,51,885/- is accepted as explained and balance cash deposit of Rs. 5,82,385/- is computed as unexplained income of the assessee for AY 2011-12. Hence amount of Rs. 5,82,385/- is added back to the income of assessee to tax for the year under consideration as unexplained income received from undisclosed sources u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. (Addition: - Rs 5,82,385/- u/s 68 of the IT Act) I am satisfied that assessee has concealed the particulars of income for the relevant period therefore; penalty proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... val from the proper authority reopened the case of the appellant u/s 147 of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act. The appellant responded to the notice and filed his submission and filed ITR for the impugned year on 18.08.2018. During the assessment proceedings the appellant did not raise any objection regarding the reopening of the assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the act. The reopening of the case by the Assessing Officer is treated to be valid for two reasons. Firstly there was reasonable amount of cash deposit and share transaction of Rs. 128 crores and no information regarding filing of ITR by the appellant. Secondly the appellant has accepted the reopening u/s 147 of the Act by filing ITR in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act and by not raising any objection regarding reassessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer. 6.1.2 The Assessing Officer had collected information regarding cash deposit and out of the cash deposit of Rs. 10,51,885/- found the amount of Rs. 4,69,500/- to be explained and added the balance to the total income of the appellant u/s 68 of the Act. The appellant during appeal hearing did not provide any other reason to refute the findin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of assessee, it is recorded by the AO that no return was filed by the assessee and there was huge transaction in shares. The grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. Thus, addition made in respect of cash deposits is sustained to the extent of Rs. 2,50,000/- and in respect of share transactions, the addition made by the Revenue is hereby confirmed. The grounds of appeal are partly allowed. [Emphasis is ours] 12. What is not disputed by the appellant/assessee, who appears in person, is that after the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued, the ROI was filed, in which the nominal income amounting to Rs. 4,470/- was shown. It is, however the submission of the appellant/assessee that the nominal income was shown although the appellant/assessee had suffered a loss, as he was advised to do so by the AO. 12.1 In support of his plea that the appellant/assessee had indeed suffered a loss, our attention is drawn to the computation sheet that was filed before the AO [See page 71 of the casefile.] Based on this document, the appellant/assessee claims that he had, in fact, suffered a loss amounting to Rs. 3,39,373.75/-. 12.2 The argument of the appellant/assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
