TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purposes that was operated by son and not by the assessee. Sri Rahul H. Shah has also made a declaration before the AO that the transactions in the Corporation Bank Account were duly recorded in his books of account. In a situation when a tax payer, i.e., a son is duly disclosing the said transaction in the regular course in his books of account and those entries were duly disclosed in the income tax return then those very entries are not required to be again assessed, if Revenue is not satisfied, in the hands of that person who is one of the account holder. Although, the name of the assessee appeared as first name in the said bank account but for all practical purposes the son was operating that account as is evident from several eviden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ective basis. 1.1 Side by side the appellant has also raised an additional ground of appeal as under: 1. Alternatively and without prejudice to other grounds ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that assessment order framed on protective basis in absence of substantive assessment framed at all is illegal, void ab initio and against the principles of law that deserves to be quashed. It be so held now. 2. Facts in brief as emerged from the corresponding assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144 of IT Act dated 23.12.2010 were that the assessee in individual capacity has declared an income of ₹ 1,49,872/-. However an addition of ₹ 19,89,225/- was made; hence, total income was assessed a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated as explained as the same were state to be recorded in the books of accounts of appellant's son. The evidence should be produced for this by the appellant. No any evidence to this fact was filed to justify the claim by the Ld. Counsel. In view thereof, the cash deposit of ₹ 19,89,225/- are treated as unexplained and the addition so made is confirmed. Since the Assessing Officer has made the addition in hands of the assessee on protective basis, the same are considered as substantive basis in the hands of the assessee. The ground of appeal is accordingly dismissed. 4. Before us, learned AR, Urvashi Shodhan has first argued the additional ground primarily on the basis that in the absence of substantive assessment there was n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n an order of Hon ble Supreme Court pronounced in the case of Lalji Haridas Vs. ITO, 43 ITR 387 (SC). 5. On the other hand, from the side of the Revenue, learned Sr.D.R., Sri B.L. Yadav has vehemently argued that there is no bar that only when a substantive addition has been made thereafter a protective assessment could be made. Learned Sr.D.R. has also objected the raising of the additional ground at this stage of appeal. In respect of this objection reliance was placed on Batlioi Co. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (1998) 67 ITD 397 (Mum.). On the issue of substantive assessment to be made, he has placed reliance upon the decision of Hon ble ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Suresh K. Jajoo Vs. ACIT, Circle 4(2) Mumbai, (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... awn as on 31st March, 2008 a Corporation Bank SB Account No.15986 was duly disclosed. The deposits were in the regular course of business on several dates and some of the entries were contra entries in the bank account. Learned AR has pleaded on the basis of those evidences that although the said bank account stood in the name of the assessee as well as in the name of her son but for all purposes that was operated by son and not by the assessee. Sri Rahul H. Shah has also made a declaration before the AO that the transactions in the Corporation Bank Account were duly recorded in his books of account. 6.2 In a situation when a tax payer, i.e., a son is duly disclosing the said transaction in the regular course in his books of account and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
