9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es which aggregated to ₹ 1,80,52,273/-. We have also observed from the perusal of the bank statements of the two banks that assessee at no point of time has any substantial money accumulating in these bank accounts. Therefore, the theory invoked by the ld. AO that assessee has unexplained investments u/s 69 of the Act is wrong and against the facts on record. It is only for this reason the addition made by the ld. AO u/s 69 of the Act is ordered to be deleted by setting aside the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Second addition on estimation - We note that the ld. AO has applied 8% on other deposits in the bank accounts/ aggregate to ₹ 71,62,220/-. We observe from the profit and loss account, that the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondoned. 05. The only issue raised against the confirmation of addition of ₹ 5,72,978/- and ₹ 1,62,88,300/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO in respect of estimation of income at the rate of 8% on total deposit in bank account amounting to ₹ 71,62,220/- and cash deposit in the bank accounts of the assessee during the year of ₹ 1,62,88.300/-, respectively. 06. The facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in the business of renting cold storage for which it used to charge rentals. During the year the assessee did not file any return of income despite notice u/s 142(1) of the Act issued to the assessee on 05.12.2017, requesting the assessee to furnish the return of income but there was no compliance fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding the order of ld. AO, deciding the issues based on the facts available, when the assessee failed to file any written submission. 09. The ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment passed by the ld. AO is bad in law and nullity for the reason that no addition has been made in the assessment order and therefore, the same is bad in law and may be quashed on merit. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is operating a cold storage and derive income by way of rental income from the storage space let out. The ld. AR referred to the audited accounts of the assessee and submitted that during the year, the total income from operation was ₹ 1,80,64,642/- and the total expenses against the said income were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailable before the ld. AO which state that after every receipt which was business receipt, the money was withdrawn for the operational expenses and only meagre balance is left in the bank account and at any point of time the balance ever exceeded even ₹ 3.24 lacs. Therefore, finding of the ld. AO is totally wrong. So far as the second addition of 8% on the other deposits in the bank account of the assessee are concerned, the counsel submitted that the assessee has not recorded any basis for estimating the said income, even in the case of best judgement assessment the ld. AO has to estimate the income at some reasonable and comparative basis which is missing and therefore, the same may also be deleted. 010. The ld. DR on the other han ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
