Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 1103 - AT - Income TaxUndisclosed source of cash deposited in the Vijaya Bank account - it is the case of the assessee that such amounts cannot be treated as income in his hands as his only income is the margin/commission in the auction proceedings - Held that:- The assessee is making only pleadings before lower authorities that he is an auctioneer; his income is only the margin/commission; and the deposits in the bank account cannot be treated as his income, etc. It is the duty of the assessee to prove before the assessing authority that the cash deposits reflected in his Vijaya Bank account in fact related to the monies received from the persons who participated in the auctions. The responsibility cannot be discharged by just explaining that he is carrying on the business of auctioning. An auctioneer is in fact bound to keep meticulous accounts and particulars regarding his auction activities. Inspite of that, the assessee did not produce any details before the assessing authority. The result is that the assessee could not explain to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the source of cash deposited by him in the Vijaya Bank account. The cash deposits reflected in the Vijaya Bank account always remained unexplained. In these circumstances, the only course of action available to the Assessing Officer is to treat those cash deposits as unexplained credits. Therefore, we find that the Assessing Officer has rightly made additions in the hands of the assessee. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel has argued that even if additions were called for, the gross amounts of cash deposits could not be added for the reason that the assessee being an auctioneer, is entitled only for margin/commission. The learned counsel also contended that alternatively the peak amount alone should have been added. But, we are not in a position to accept the above alternative grounds, because the facts of the case do not justify even those alternative grounds. The basic reason for addition is the absence of evidence and details with the assessee to prove the genuineness of the source of deposits. When that is the case, the argument of margin/commission is not sustainable. As the assessee has not produced any of the details regarding the flow of funds, it is also not possible to adopt the peak amount theory. Thus we find that the lower authorities are justified in making and confirming the additions in the hands of the assessee - Decided against assessee
|