9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (3) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and net income of Rs. 5,65,880/- earned through commission after claiming Chapter-VIA deductions. The assessee is doing business of providing bank facility held by him for purchase of Demand Drafts, etc., by the liquor merchants. The assessee mainly provided facilities to the liquor merchants for purchase of Demand Drafts. For this purpose, the assessee is maintaining two different bank accounts namely, SBI, Gopalpuram Branch, Warangal and IDBI, Warangal Branch. The facilities include depositing of the money into the bank account and getting the Demand Drafts issued by the bank. In order to verify the genuineness of the transactions, the Assessing Officer issued summons u/sec.133(6) of the Act and obtained bank statements. The Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings and in not calling for remand report under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962. 3. The Id CIT(A) erred both on facts and in law in directing the AO to estimate the income @ 100% of purchases in the absence of any proof in the form of valid Audit Reports or Audited Financials etc., to suggest that the cash receipts are sourced out of assessee's business. 4. The Id CIT(A) erred in directing to treat the entries in the bank accounts as liquor purchase in the absence of any valid proofs and even in the absence of liquor license in the name of the assessee." 5. During the course of hearing, Learned DR at the very out submitted that the order of the learned CIT(A) was received in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the Tribunal. The Learned DR has explained the reasons and from the explanation of the Learned DR the Assessing Officer could not file appeal on or before the due date due to administrative exigencies. Therefore, in our considered view, there is a 'sufficient cause' for the Revenue in not filing the appeal in time and thus, the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal is condoned and the appeal of the Revenue is admitted for adjudication. 8. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that that in so far as additions made by the Assessing Officer towards cash deposits into bank accounts and estimation of 10% profit by the learned CIT(A), the assessee has furnished all evidences including relevant affidavits from vari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g as a facilitator for various liquor dealers and the cash deposit is out of amount received from certain parties for purchasing in favour of Telangana State Breweries Corporation Limited and Prohibition & Excise Department is un-proved. The Assessing Officer further observed that although the assessee claims to have received funds from various liquor dealers, the fact remains that none of them have furnished relevant evidences including their income tax returns to prove source for cash given to the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer opined that the total credits including cash deposits into bank account were treated as unexplained cash credits of the assessee and thus, addition has been made u/sec.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and we ourselves fully subscribe to the reasons given by the learned CIT(A) for the simple reason that, assessee with a no means has worked as a facilitator for various liquor dealers for online submission of application to State Prohibition & Excise Department for getting licenses which is evident from the DDs obtained from the Bank and transferred to State Prohibition & Excise Department. Further the assessee had also extended services to few people who got licenses from State Excise Department and for procurement of liquor from Telangana State Breweries Corporation Limited, he has taken DDs in favour of Corporation, which is evident from funds transferred to Telangana State Breweries Corporation Limited. The assessee has treated the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e learned CIT(A) were already on record before the Assessing Officer and, therefore, in our considered view, it is not a case of violation of Rule 46A of I.T. Rules, 1962 as alleged by the Learned DR. 9.2. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that there is no error in the reasons given by the learned CIT(A) in estimating the profit @ 10% on total credits appearing in the bank account of the assessee. Thus, we are inclined to uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) and reject the grounds raised by the Revenue. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 10. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 06.03.2025 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
