TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1512X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n question but the AO chose not to adversely comment the same, the natural presumption is that the assessee’s calculation was correct. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was justified in sustaining the addition at ₹ 40,17,517/-. We are unable to comprehend the rationale behind the assessee’s assailing the addition to the extent sustained in the first appeal, because the same is based only on the working of net professional receipts submitted by the assessee himself. We, therefore, dismiss these two grounds taken by the Revenue and the challenge made by the assessee to the sustenance of this addition in his ground of appeal. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition of income from undisclosed sources - CIT(A) deleted part addition - Held that:- Assessee categorically stated before the AO that certain deposits in saving bank account no. 702611 maintained with ABN Amro Bank, were transfer entries from one account to another. Even entry-wise details were also furnished which the AO refused to accept for want of any further corroboration. When the current account and savings bank account were available with him, the AO was obliged to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iness premises of the assessee at 101, Nilgiri Apartments, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. During the course of survey operations, it was noticed that the assessee received professional receipts through cheques as well as in cash, but, had declared in his return of income only the amounts received by cheques. During the course of survey operations, certain diaries, registers, loose papers, data from computer copied in hard disk etc. were impounded. These documents were marked as Annexure A-1 to A-27. Entries in these registers were confronted to the assessee during the course of recording of his statement at the time of survey on 1.2.2010. Vide question no. 10, the assessee was required to produce his books of account for the assessment year 2005-06 to 2009-10, in response to which it was stated that the same will be produced, but were never produced. The assessee was confronted with the registers incorporating the entries of receipts of fee. On being called upon to identify whether such entries in the registers pertained to him, the assessee replied that the same pertained to M/s C C Associates, being the professional firm, in which he was a partner for some period of the year under c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of impound ed material Receipts recorded from pages (in Rs.) Total amount of receipts during the month (in Rs.) Expenses of cheque Expenses of cash (by other name) Net profit for the month Page No. 1 April, 2004 A-7 77-74 4,94,580 50,583 76,711 3,67,286 74 2 May,, 2004 -do- 73-70 5,27,390 47913 81288 3,98,189/- 70 3 June, 2004 -do- 69-65 4,16,680/- 99,308 79,755/- 2,37,617/- 65 4 July, 2004 -do- 64-61 6,05,259/- 96,382 96,708/- 4,12,169/- 61 5 Aug, 2004 -do- 60-53 16,99,797/- 1,22,529/- 3,41,329/- 12,35,939 53 6 Sept., 2004 -do- 52-48 8,61,399/- 1,04,008/- 1,24,470/- 6,32,921 48 7 Oct, 2004 -do- 47-43 4,91,775/- 86,302/- 60,250/- 3,45,223 43 8 Nov, 2004 -do- 42-36 5,93,113/- 73,987/- 54,195/- 4,64,931 36 9 Dec, 2004 -do- 35-30 7,14,291/- 1,02,836/- 75,649/- 5,35,806 30 10 Jan, 2005 -do- 29-23 7,87,609/- 2,03, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that the income was not affected by these adjustments. He, however, concurred with the assessee s submission about the exclusion of income offered for two months, namely, April and May, 2004 because this was earned by the partnership firm in which the assessee was a partner at the material time. After deducting net profit of April and May, 2004 amounting to ₹ 3,67,286/- and ₹ 3,98,189/- respectively, from the total net profit as per Register A-7 amounting to ₹ 61.66 lac as reproduced above, the AO determined the amount of professional income at ₹ 54,00,889/-. Since this was the amount of month-wise net profit as per the assessee s own register found during the course of survey, after exclusion of expenses, the AO held that no separate 50% deduction of gross receipts on the basis of rough estimation was warranted since the amount of actual expenses was deducted. He, therefore, treated the net profit from profession at ₹ 54,00,889/- as per the impounded registers as opposed to a sum of ₹ 22,58,500/- which was declared by the assessee in the revised return of income. During the course of the first appellate proceedings, the assessee filed, inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulation was correct. Under these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) was justified in sustaining the addition at ₹ 40,17,517/-. We are unable to comprehend the rationale behind the assessee s assailing the addition to the extent sustained in the first appeal, because the same is based only on the working of net professional receipts submitted by the assessee himself. We, therefore, dismiss these two grounds taken by the Revenue and the challenge made by the assessee to the sustenance of this addition in his ground of appeal. 7. Ground no. 3 is against restricting the addition of income from undisclosed sources from ₹ 4,99,266/- to ₹ 2,82,838/-. The assessee has also challenged the sustenance of addition. 8. Succinctly, the facts of this ground are that the assessee also maintained a savings bank account No.702611 with ABN Amro Bank (Now RBS) during the year under consideration, which was not disclosed for income-tax purpose. The AO extracted deposits in the said savings account from 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005 totaling to ₹ 5,35,560.52. On being called upon to explain the nature of the above deposit entries in the bank accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s justified in reducing the addition to ₹ 2,82,838/-, being the same amount as was offered by the assessee himself. Again, we do not find any logic behind the assessee s contention for allowing further relief because the assessee himself admitted undisclosed income from this bank account amounting to ₹ 2,82,838/-. We, therefore, countenance the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) on this score. 10. Last effective ground of the Revenue s appeal is against the deletion of addition of ₹ 15,490/-. The AO included bank interest of ₹ 15,490/- in the total income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) deleted this addition by observing that the bank interest representing interest income of ₹ 15,490/- already stood added by the AO in the assessee s total income as a part of total credits appearing in the savings bank account. 11. Having heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record, it is noticed that bank interest of ₹ 15,490/- emanating from the savings bank account which was not disclosed by the assessee and other credit entries in this bank account, except the transfer entries, have been separately added, for which we have sustained ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
