9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1569X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firming the addition of Rs. 24,26,960/- made by the AO. The assessee has raised the legal issue of service of notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 03.04.2017 as barred by limitation. The Ld.CIT(A) has noted that the notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short "the Act") was issued on 31.03.2017 which was the last day for validly issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Since the AO had issued the notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 30.03.2017 and there is no evidence to prove that the same has been issued after 31.03.2017, and even if the assessee received the notice only on 03.04.2017, according to us, it would not vitiate the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act; and in the absence of any evidence to show that the notice has been issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t up before the JCIT who gave his recommendation on 29.03.2017 and the Ld.PCIT granted approval on 30.03.2017 and pursuant thereto, the AO had issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 31.03.2017 which action can't be faulted on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, explanation-2(a) of section 147 of the Act, aids in reopening which reads as under: Explanation 2.-For the purposes of this section, the following shall also be deemed to be cases where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, namely :- (a) where no return of income has been furnished by the assessee although his total income or the total income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year exceeded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of assessee has accepted that her income is interest derived from lending of money and the AO has accepted the return filed by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,79,430/- [pursuant to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act]. And likewise for AY 2012-13, the AO vide order dated 13.12.2019 on similar facts has accepted the return filed by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 2,19,610/- [in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act]. However, the AO for AY 2010-11 vide order dated 26.12.2018 departed from the aforesaid action and added the entire deposit in the bank account to the tune of Rs. 24,26,960/- by passing an ex parte order qua assessee. The assessee has filed the copy of the bank statement [Corporation Bank SB A/c No.01664010] from 01.04.2009 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ank during the relevant year under consideration is deemed to be undisclosed money of the assessee. The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Bhaiyalal Shyam Behari v. CIT reported in [2005] 276 ITR 38 (All.), observed that the assessee was entitled to take up the plea of the addition of the peak credit which only need to be treated as the income of the assessee. In order to make a plea of peak credit, the assessee has to lay down the factual foundation that all cash credit entries in the books of accounts belongs to the assessee i.e. it is the assessee's own money. Then only the question of peak credit can be validly raised. In the present case, the assessee has owned up the cash which was deposited & withdrawn as her own money, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
