TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 158X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nse to the same, the bank has submitted the statement on account of the assessee for the period 1.4.2008 to 31.3.2009 which confirmed that cash deposit of ₹ 25,07,400/-. The assessee was confronted that the cash deposits in his bank account. We find that before the assessee has changed its stand before the Ld. CIT(A) as rightly stated by the Ld. DR. Assessee has stated that he has withdrawn the cash from the bank for the purchase of land but again deposited the same due to non-utilization of the same. Assessee has also changed his stand that he has received some advance from his father-in-law and also filed confirmation alongwith PAN card. This averment has not been made before the AO and the Ld. First Appellate Authority has wrong ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellate proceedings was unable to prove the existence of M/s Locus Propbuild Pvt. Ltd. From whom ₹ 16,00,000/- was claimed to have been received and also creditworthiness of lenders from whom ₹ 4,53,000/- and ₹ 3,00,000/- were claimed to have received. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has declared income from job work as Civil Contractor and white washing. On the AIR information it reveals that assesseee has deposited Cash of ₹ 25,07,400/- in his AXIS Bank Saving account and Purchased Motor Vehicle of ₹ 5,44, 478/- from Sri Durga Automobiles.The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish necessary details in respect of these transactions. In response to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rities with the remarks left . Assessee also did not furnish any substantial document in this respect even after providing sufficient opportunity to him and lastly the AO held that entire deposit of ₹ 25,07,400/- remain unexplained and he added as income of the assessee, u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 2.1 Secondly, AO has also added ₹ 34,423/- on account of bank interest which the assessee has earned, as per the bank statement of Axis bank. But has not been offered to tax in his return of income filed for the relevant assessment years. 2.2 Thirdly, the AO has also added ₹ 1,64,100/- on account of unexplained money and added the same to the income of the assessee u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, because assessee has purchased moto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7; 16,00,000/- from M/s Locus Propbuild Pvt. Ltd.; ₹ 3,00,000/- received as repayment of loan by Mr. Satish Chandra Bhandari and ₹ 4,53,000/- received as repayment of loan by Sh. Badri Prasad Meena for which he has not filed any evidence before the AO. Ld. DR further stated that assessee has also raised a new argument before the Ld. First Appellate Authority regarding receive of money for the purchase of land which was not pleaded before the AO by him. Ld. DR stated that assessee has changed its stand before the Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. CIT(A) accepted the version of the assessee and wrongly deleted the additions in dispute. Hence, he requested that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be cancelled and the order of the AO may be upheld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the cash from three persons namely ₹ 16,00,000/- from M/s Locus Propbuild Pvt. Ltd.; ₹ 3,00,000/- received as repayment of loan by Mr. Satish Chandra Bhandari and ₹ 4,53,000/- received as repayment of loan by Sh. Badri Prasad Meena. Assessee has also earned some bank interest as per the bank statement i.e. amounting to ₹ 34,423/- which he has not offered to tax in the return of income. As regards the purchase of vehicle the assessee has purchased a car for ₹ 6,17,538/- out of this amount ₹ 4,93,438/- was financed by the assessee from ICICI bank and the balance amount of ₹ 1,64,100/- remained unexplained which AO has added as income of the assessee u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act. 7.1 We find that before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
