TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for which bills were raised in the earlier previous year also – as the receipts admitted by the appellant, for the Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2006-07, in their P&L A/c are more than the receipts as per TDS certificates, it cannot be concluded that the appellant has suppressed the professional receipts – against revenue. Investment in Mutual Funds admittedly made out of disclosed bank account of the assessee – Held that:- As the assessee failed to explain the source, nature and mode of payment of such investments along with supporting papers and documents such an investment is treated as unexplained - merely because the transactions was put through Bank account, does not make it a genuine/bonafide transaction – against assessee. Ann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credited to Rs.28,99,381/-. So, there is a discrepancy of Rs.14,88,972/- which was added back to the total income of the assessee. Consequential tax effect was much above Rs.2 lac. (iv) That the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition on conjecture and surmises and no strong evidences could be produced by the assessee even in the appeal stage. ITA Nos.53 54/Kol/2010 (by the assessee A.Yrs.2005-06 2006-07) 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in both A.Yrs.:- 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.6,39,019(Rs.29,00,000/- for A.Yr.2006-07) being assessee s investment in Mutual Funds admittedly made out of disclosed bank account of the assessee. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted in the returns filed for the Assessment Years 2003-04 and 2005-06 are less than the professional receipts as per the TDS certificates. However, for the Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2006-07 the professional receipts admitted in the P L A/c, accounts are more than the receipts as per TDS certificates. The receipts during the year relevant for the Assessment Year 2005-06 may not tally with the bills raised during the previous year because the received during the year include amounts for which bills were raised in the earlier previous year also. Further, as can be seen from the chart extracted in Page-4 indicates that the receipts admitted by the appellant, for the Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2006-07, in their P L A/c are more than t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to explain the same along with substantial and documentary evidences. As such the investment of Rs.6,55,119/- is treated as unexplained. Hence the value of the investment of Rs.6,55,119/- is treated as the deemed income of the assessee u/s 69 of the I.T.Act and added to the returned income of the assessee. Similarly for A.Yr. 2006-07 an amount of Rs.29,00,000/- has been added u/s 69 of the IT Act. 8.1. On appeal the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same for both the A.Years by observing as under :- I have carefully perused the above. I have also perused the appellant s Bank statements for the relevant period. It is seen, from the written submissions that the appellant has made investments, during the previous year, in Mutual Funds, aggrega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0) 132 TTJ 257 (ITAT,Mum) 4. Malti Gupta vs ITO - ITA No.18/Ind./2010(ITAT, Indore) 5. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited vs CIT (2011) 336 ITR 136 (Del) 6. CIT vs Jet Airways (I)Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) we are of the view that in the present case the issue is relating to the investment made in the disclosed bank accounts which was not substantiated by the assessee with any corroborative evidences. The fact that the bank account disclosed is not so material when compared to the fact the deposits made in the said account is explained or not. Since in this case the assessee is unable to explain the deposits made in the said bank accounts which was ultimately invested in the mutual funds. We find no infirmity in the orders of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
