9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the requisite conditions for assessment were not fulfilled. 2. That the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and facts of the case in denying the benefit of opening balance of cash. 3. The Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as Assessing authority has erred in law and facts while not appreciating the submission and explanations filed by the assessee during the appeal and assessment proceedings. 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law in upholding the part addition of Rs. 23,00,000 on account of cash deposit into bank and have been wrongly treated as alleged unexplained income. 5. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in law in not allowing the credit of business gross turn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... btaining the report from the Assessing Officer and the comments from the assessee on the report, the ld. CIT (Appeals) partly sustained the addition to the extent of Rs. 23,00,000/- observing that the benefit of opening cash of Rs. 19,24,286/- cannot be given to the assessee. Further the negative balance of Rs. 3,75,714/- is also added to the income of the assessee thereby sustaining the addition to the extent of Rs. 23,00,000/- observing as under:- "3.2 Grounds of Appeal Nos. 2 & 3 are regarding passing an ex-parte order u/s 144 and making addition of Rs. 71,10,000/- on account of cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee. The AO has mentioned that the return declaring an income of Rs. 1,96,920/- (plus agriculture income of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ient opportunities were provided to the assessee but no explanation was offered. It is further mentioned that in the return for assessment year 2013-14, the assessee has shown gross receipt of Rs. 32,25,780/- and net profit of Rs. 2,62,920/- @ 8.15% but the assessee has neither declared his nature of business nor he has taken any single entry from business receipts in the cash flow statement. The submissions of the assessee were thus not found acceptable. It is also mentioned that though the assessee has claimed sale of agriculture crop amounting to Rs. 9,03,356/- to M/s. Fateh Singh Niyamat Singh, however in the return the assessee declared agriculture income of Rs. 2,52,100/- only. It is also mentioned that in the account statement with M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the month of February and March, 2012. As mentioned by the AO in the remand report, from the Income Tax return, it is seen that the assessee has declared agriculture income of Rs. 2,52,100/- apart from normal income of Rs. 1,96,920/- which as per the AO, are only sufficient to meet the household/personal expenses of the assessee. It is also relevant to note that no amounts have been debited on account of agriculture expenses in the cash flow statement, although the receipts of Rs. 9,03,356/- in the shape of J-Form for sale of agriculture crops have been filed. On the basis of facts mentioned by the AO in the assessment order and in the remand report and after considering the documents filed by the AR, the claim regarding the agriculture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
