TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income and even the AO has admitted in the assessment order that there are deposits as well as withdrawals in the bank account of the assessee - in the absence of any other source of income, the CIT(A) was justified in holding that the entire amount of deposit in the bank account could not be treated as unexplained - The cash deposit was correctly found to be explained out of receipts of the assessee from transport business - CIT(A) considered the bank account of the assessee and the registration certificates and computation of income filed with the return of income for the purpose of passing the appellate order - there is nothing illegality in his order in reducing the addition – Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 273/Agra/2013 Asst. year : 2008-09 - - - Dated:- 14-2-2014 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, JJ. For Appellant by :- Shri Athesham Ansari, Jr. D.R. For Respondent by :- Shri Sahib P. Satsangee, C.A. ORDER Per Bhavnesh Saini, J.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-I, Agra dated 06.03.2013 for the assessment year 2008-09 on the following grounds : 1. That the Ld. CIT (A)-1, Agra has erred in Law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m, Citi Financial, Indiabull and Centurian etc. As per details discussed by the AO in the assessment order there are deposits as well as withdrawals in this bank account. However, in absence of any explanation filed by the assessee, he has considered the entire amount of deposit of ₹ 11,76,457/- as unexplained cash deposit and made the addition for the entire amount of the cash deposits in the income of the assessee and thus, the total assessed income of the assessee has been determined at ₹ 12,96,457/-. 4. The assessee challenged the addition before the ld. CIT(A) and the submissions of the assessee are reproduced in the appellate order, in which the assessee explained that the details could not be filed of source of cash deposited in the bank account on account of shifting of the residence. The assessee is carrying on the business of transportation and filed return of income declaring income of ₹ 1,20,000/- and the source of the cash deposited in the bank account was out of receipts from transportation business. The cash deposit in the bank account was out of realization of transportation charges duly recorded in the cash book. The assessee, therefore, plead ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee (appellant) during the year under consideration, has not been calculated as per section 44AE because full details of the trucks and other vehicles owned by the assessee (appellant) have not been given and computation of income as per provision of section 44AE has not been furnished. After discussion with the Id. AR and taking into account the totality of facts of the case, it has been found that though the assessee (appellant) is owner of two tankers, he is also earning income by way of running of vehicle on commission basis and, therefore, a profit loss account has been prepared to compute his income instead of computing the income on the basis of section 44AE for two tankers owned by him. Therefore, it would not be logical to accept that the income of the assessee (appellant) is to be calculated as per section 44AE because even the Id. AR, while making submission during the appeal has not made the computation of the income of the assessee (appellant) as per section 44AE. The profit loss account furnished by the Id. AR during appeal proceeding has been found to be as not admissible as per rule 46A because the same was not filed during the course of assessment proceeding. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,40,000/-, the assessee (appellant) has shown a profit of ₹ 1,20,000/- which comes to be at profit rate of 6.5%. As the assessee (appellant) has not maintained the regular books of account and his income is also not being computed as per provision of section 44AE from the two tankers owned by him because he was running other vehicles also on commission basis, which were not owned by him, his income is to be estimated based on the information available on record and also taking into account the information provided during the appeal. As per the information disclosed in the return of income filed by the appellant, he has shown total gross receipts at ₹ 8,40,000/- and after deduction expenses of ₹ 7,20,000/-, he has shown a net profit of ₹ 1,20,000/-. This information disclosed in the return of income gives the average rate of earning of commission income by the assessee from transport business at 14.28%. After considering the cash deposits made in the bank accounts and the total amount of gross receipts disclosed during the appeal proceeding at ₹ 18,40,000/- in the P L account filed by the Ld. AR, it has been found that the assessee (appellant) has su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rning income by way of running of vehicles on commission basis. The ld. CIT(A) on looking to the nature of entries of cash deposits and withdrawals found in the bank account of the assessee maintained with ICICI bank held that the entire amount of deposit made in the bank account cannot be said to be unexplained because after deposit of the cash amounts, there are withdrawals. Since the assessee is in the business of transportation, the explanation of the assessee could not be refused that such deposits have been made out of transport business income. The ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any material on record taken the gross receipts of ₹ 18,40,000/- which are more than the deposits made in the bank account. The assessee in the income statement (PB-6) filed with the return of income specifically mentioned earning of ₹ 1,20,000/- being income from transportation business and at the end of the page, total receipts are mentioned at ₹ 8,40,000/-, expenses ₹ 7,20,000/- and net profit ₹ 1,20,000/-. It would, therefore, give the detail that the total receipts of the assessee were in a sum of ₹ 16,80,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) taken the gross receipts more than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
