9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1031X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concur with the same. Assessee had made cash deposits in his savings bank account in Punjab Sind Bank and also received interest income on the said deposits during the year, but had not filed his return of income, therefore, the said facts were sufficient for the A.O to form a bona fide believe that the income of the assessee chargeable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. Addition u/s 69 - As the assessee had neither filed any explanation as regards the cash deposits made in his bank account during the year under consideration; or as regards the interest income earned on the same, therefore, find no reason to intervene with the well-reasoned view taken by the lower authorities who had rightly held the same as his unexplained investment u/s. 69 - Decided against assessee. - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member For the Assessee : None For the Revenue : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 04.07.2023, which in tu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion that the assessee had during the year made cash deposits of Rs. 12,91,000/- in his savings bank account with Punjab Sind Bank and also earned interest income of Rs. 58,538/- on the same but had not filed his return of income, the A.O reopened his case u/s. 147 of the Act. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 25.03.2018 was issued by the ITO, Ward-1(3), Raipur, which, however, was not complied with by the assessee. 3. As the assessee had failed to comply with the aforesaid notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, dated 25.03.2018, and did not file his return of income, the ACIT-1(1), Bhilai to whom the case was transferred vide his order u/s. 144 r.w.s.147 dated 08.12.2018, made an addition of Rs. 13,49,538/- [Rs.12,91,000/- (+) Rs. 58,538/-]. 4. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals) but without success. The CIT(Appeals), while upholding the addition made by the A.O had observed as follows: 5.1 The fact relating to the present appeal, in brief are that the AO came to know that during the year under consideration the assessee had deposited Rs. 12,91,000/-in his bank account in cash. The assessee also had not filed his return of income for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n current assessment year no documentary evidence has been produced. As also discussed in para 5.2 above, the assessee also does not intend to support his argument with any evidence. Therefore, the argument contained in this ground is considered to be bald and consequently being dismissed. On the basis of discussion in para 5.3 and this paragraph Ground no. 1 is being dismissed. 6. The appeal is dismissed. 5. The assessee, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals), has carried the matter in appeal before me. 6. Before proceeding any further, I may herein observe that though an application dated 16.10.2023 requesting for adjournment in the present case has been filed by Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, Chartered Accountant, but in the absence of any power of attorney having been issued in his favor by the assessee, no cognizance of the same can be drawn. 7. As the assessee appellant, despite having been intimated about the hearing of the appeal, had neither put up an appearance nor moved any valid application for adjournment; therefore, I am constrained to proceed with the matter as per Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and dispose off the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are issued in supersession of the earlier instructions and shall be applicable with effect from 1-4-2011. As the very basis for vesting pecuniary jurisdiction with the ACs/DCs in itself is based upon the income declared, i.e., the income disclosed by an assessee in his return of income, the same, thus, would not assist the case of the present assessee before me. I, say so, for the reason that as the assessee in the present case had not filed any return of income for the year under consideration; therefore, the aforementioned CBDT Instruction No.1/2011 r.w. Instruction No. 6/2011 (supra) cannot be triggered in his case. Thus, the Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations. 10. Albeit, the challenge of the assessee to the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the A.O u/s. 147 of the Act for the reason that no valid notice was issued u/s. 148 of the Act, I am unable to concur with the same. As is discernible from the assessment order, the A.O. had categorically stated that notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 25.03.2018 was issued to the assessee. As no material is discernible from the record that could support the aforesai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
