9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arterly returns after one year cannot support, it was just to recharacterize the sham transaction into a genuine deal. Even the ITR for preceding year AY 2016-17 was filed by the assessee on 15.03.2017, much after the demonetization period, shows such steps are taken to cover bogus transactions. Further, nothing has been brought on record to show that the assessee is functioning with the similar magnitude in the business of trading of pulses in the preceding and succeeding year, thus, the finding of the Ld. AO on the basis of large transactions with the buyers without PAN / unidentifiable and were not produced before the Ld. AO, during the year of demonization and huge cash deposits. CIT(A) had rightly appreciated the facts that the total turnover of assessee of Rs. 93.17 lac includes cash deposit of Rs. 75.69 lacs i.e., almost 81%, during the period 13.11.2016 to 16.12.2016, further the month wise stocks, sales and purchase along with details of cash deposits were not furnished by the assessee. Another aspect observed by the revenue authorities was that the most of transactions were exclusively executed with the sister concern of the assessee, which could not be located by the Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Labour Contractors (2008) (P H); Indwell Constructions (1998) (AP). Additional Gr. No. 2: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, assessment made u/s 143(3) is invalid; after specifying various defects in the books of account examined by the AO, books of account has been rejected by applying sec 145(3); only course was available with the AO to make assessment u/s 144 i.e., best judgment assessment, which has not been made by the revenue; assessment made u/s 143(3) is liable to be quashed; relied on Forum Sales (P) Ltd (2024) (Del HC); Marg Ltd (2017) (Mad HC); Anil Kumar Co (2016) (Kar HC) Subhendu Kumar Subudhi (2022) (Ori HC). 3. Concisely stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of trading of pulses and runs his business under the name of M/s Mohd. Rafiq Traders. Had filed his return of income for AY 2017-18 on 31.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 9,63,070/-. The case thereafter was selected for scrutiny. Statutory notices under section 143(2) 142(1) were issued. In response to the said notices, replies were furnished by the assessee through online module. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income u/s 68 of Act. 5. Further the cash of Rs. 2,00,000/- deposited by the assessee in his personal bank account was also treated as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act, which is explained to be personal savings of the assessee, but in absence of any documentary support to such contention the same are treated as unexplained cash credit. 6. With the aforesaid 2 additions the total income of the assessee has been determined at Rs. 97,41,070/-. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however with no success the appeal of the assessee was dismissed, with following observations: 6.2.3 It is noticed from the assessment order that the assessee has made total cash deposits of Rs. 87,78,000/- in his bank account maintained with Bank of India, Bhatapara during the period of demonetization. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish the details of all bank accounts either individually or jointly, copy of bank statement along with narration of entries of deposits and withdrawals, source of cash deposit in the bank with other details, copy of cash book, month wise details of purchases sales and details of persons from who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctitious transactions. In view of the above, I uphold the assessment of the entire cash deposits of Rs 85,78,000/- u/s 68 r.w.s 115BBE and this ground of appeal is dismissed. 6.2.7 Regarding the cash deposit of Rs 2,00,000/- in bank account 935610310000016 with Bank of India, Bhatapara, since the appellant has not been able to explain the source of the same, the addition of this amount u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE is also upheld and this ground of appeal is also dismissed. 8. At the threshold, Shri Sunil Agrawal, Authorized Representative of the assessee (in short Ld. AR ), submitted that the present appeal is delayed by 15 days. While explaining in delay in filing of the appeal, an application for condonation of delay along with affidavit of the assessee was filed. It is apprised that the assessee, at the time of issuance of appellate order by the Ld. CIT(A) on 07.04.2023 was unable to access on the portal as well as on his email, thereafter the assessee went for religious journey to Makka Madina from 28.12.2023 till 23.01.2024, therefore, the delay of 15 days occasioned due to unintentional / bonafide reasons beyond the control of assessee. We have considered the plea by the Ld. AR and f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ks of accounts have never been relied upon by the Ld. AO. Similar findings were accorded by the Hon ble High Court of P H in the case of CIT vs Dullaram, Labour contractor, Kotkapura (supra), and Amitabh Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (supra), therefore, these case laws are distinguishable on facts as against the facts of the present case, so are of no help to the assessee. The plea of assessee having been filed the annual VAT returns without filing the quarterly returns after one year cannot support, it was just to recharacterize the sham transaction into a genuine deal. Even the ITR for preceding year AY 2016-17 was filed by the assessee on 15.03.2017, much after the demonetization period, shows such steps are taken to cover bogus transactions. Further, nothing has been brought on record to show that the assessee is functioning with the similar magnitude in the business of trading of pulses in the preceding and succeeding year, thus, the finding of the Ld. AO on the basis of large transactions with the buyers without PAN / unidentifiable and were not produced before the Ld. AO, during the year of demonization and huge cash deposits. Ld. CIT(A) had rightly appreciated the facts that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
