9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and hence, to verify the genuineness of cash deposit, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 05.01.2018 calling the assessee to file return of income was issued. The time allowed vide this notice u/s. 142 of the Act by the Department was up to 31.03.2018 but assessee furnished the return of income on 15.02.2019 i.e., almost 10 months after the expiry of time allowed by the Department. Hence, the AO proceeded to frame the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act and finally assessment was framed as best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act, as the assessee neither filed any reply nor furnished any details. CPC, Bangalore has issued this intimation u/s. 143(1) and regularized the return of income - Processing of return u/s. 143(1) of the Act is just a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to confirm the orders of the lower authorities. Therefore, this issue of assessee s appeal is dismissed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the assessment year 2017-18 on 15.02.2019 through electronically. Since the assessee's return was filed after the valid date i.e.31.03.2018, it treated as 'invalid return' and taken-up for scrutiny." 4. I have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. The argument of ld.counsel for the assessee is that once no notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is issued, the assessment order is invalid. I noted the fact that the assessee has not filed any return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act for the relevant assessment year 2017-18. Subsequently, the AO noticed that the assessee has deposited demonetized cash in its bank account and hence, to verify the genuineness of cash deposit, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ank credits of Rs. 1,36,60,97-/- is taken as business turnover of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 and the business income estimated to Rs. 10,92,878/- which worked out at the reasonable rate of 8% on total business turnover (8% on Rs. 1,36,60,970/-) and assessed to tax." Once there is no valid return available, the assessment has to be completed u/s. 144 of the Act. Another facet of argument made by the ld.counsel for the assessee is that the Department has made intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act on the return filed on 15.02.2019 vide order dated 12.04.2019, wherein CPC, Bangalore has issued this intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act and regularized the return of income. I don't buy this argument because processing of return u/s. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Rs. 23,32,500/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). 7. The CIT(A) also confirmed the action of the AO as the assessee has not furnished any source of cash deposit of Rs. 23,32,500/- and for this, the CIT(A) observed in para 5.4.2 and the relevant finding of CIT(A) reads as under:- "The appellant has not furnished the source of cash deposits of Rs. 23,32,500/- made during the demonetization period. The source of the same thus remains unexplained. Hence, the addition made by the AO as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 is also sustained." 8. Even now before us, the assessee apart from making bald statement that the deposit in SBNs during demonetization period fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etails or source for the cash deposit of Rs. 1,36,60,970/- and hence, he uphold the action of the AO in estimating profit rate @8% treating the same as business turnover instead of Rs. 75,52,940/- declared by assessee and then estimated the profit at Rs. 10,92,878/ by observing as under:- "As no details were furnished before the AO, the AO is justified in completing the assessment u/s. 144 of the I.T.Act, 1961 on the basis of information available with the AO. As no factual details have been furnished during the appellate proceedings, I have no option but to decide the case on facts available on record. Considering the entire facts and non- compliance by the appellant during the appellate proceedings, I upheld the action of the AO in comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
