TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m where he earned the undisclosed income. This question was asked by the Bench at the time of hearing but no positive reply was given by the ld AR of the assessee. Therefore, in absence of full details, the ld Assessing Officer has to decide the assessee’s case on estimated basis. Further the ld CIT(A) also had not passed reasoned order, so that we can conclude that he was justified in deleting the addition made by the ld Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Assessing Officer and produce all the evidences of ownership of the properties acquired in F.Y. 1997-98, 2001-02 and also during the year under consideration, so that the Assessing Officer can assess the correct income on the basis of peak theory of the bank account as discussed above. Accordingly, the revenue’s appeal is set aside to the Assessing Officer and the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only - ITA No. 673/JP/2014, C.O. No. 35/JP/2014 - - - Dated:- 23-6-2016 - SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM AND SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM For The Revenue : Shri R.S. Dangur (Addl.CIT) For The Assessee : Shri C.M. Birla (C.A.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 612000/- Bank Interest ₹ 164612/- Income from undisclosed sources ₹ 871000/- Total ₹ 1779612/- The A.O. gave reasonable opportunity of being heard on income disclosed, should not be taxed U/s 69 of the Act. The assessee had admitted that he had concealed the income which has not been disclosed. Accordingly, the ld Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 17,79,612/-. The ld Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee had not shown rent from L-113, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi Flat at ₹ 1,32,000/- for which no rent agreement had been produced and rent was received in cash. In absence of any written rent agreement, the mere explanation of the assessee cannot be accepted. It has to be something more, accordingly, he proposed rental income at ₹ 17000/- per month. The assessee had also given the reply and claimed that the assessee would have got standard deduction @ 30%, if he would have shown higher rental income, which was in his own benefit. The assessee s argument was that the assessee was getting fixe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alance was result of opening balance + income during the year withdrawals during the year. The assessee claimed that the income was separately added by the Assessing Officer and the opening balance cannot be taxed in the current year, therefore, no addition on the basis of closing balance of bank account can be made. Four benami accounts firstly disclosed in the F.Y. 2011-12 and before that these were not known to the department, therefore, benefit of these years U/s 148 was not available to the assessee as these accounts were disclosed in the first time in A.Y. 2005- 06, the same was taxed in A.Y. 2005-06. As the assessee owned these accounts for the first time in A.Y. 2005-06, the same were taxable in A.Y. 2005-06. The assessee claimed before the ld CIT(A) that out of four Benami accounts, two accounts were in the name of Kaka and S.P. Sahani , one being assessee s nick name and other was assessee s short name. He relied on the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court judgment reported in (2008) CTR 208, the same cannot be taxed. All four accounts belonged to the assessee, thus the Assessing Officer should have proceeded as if these accounts were assessee s accounts. Onc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 1584830/- (iii) SB A/c in name of Self and Wife (Nick name) (Bal. as on 01/4/2004) ₹ 2000551/- (iv) SB A/c in name of brother (bal as on 01/4/04) ₹ 32700/- (v) SB A/c in name of Self (bal. as on 01/4/04) ₹ 3317791/- ₹ 7745872/- He further submitted that the assessee had rental income of ₹ 62,000/- per month and no cash in hand had been shown in the opening balance. The assessee had shown income for A.Y. 2005-06 at ₹ 70,79,612/-. All bank entries are routed through cash book, which is cross verified by the ld Assessing Officer, if there was insufficient fund for bank deposit, it is taken as undisclosed income. Total of such income during the A.Y. 2004- 05 was ₹ 8,71,000/-. After claiming standard deduction, additional income of ₹ 15,44,610/- was disclosed by the assessee. The ld Assessing Officer had verified all entries of the bank accounts as well as cash book, which has not been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y on rent. Even the assessee had not disclosed full particulars of income from where he earned the undisclosed income. This question was asked by the Bench at the time of hearing but no positive reply was given by the ld AR of the assessee. Therefore, in absence of full details, the ld Assessing Officer has to decide the assessee s case on estimated basis. Further the ld CIT(A) also had not passed reasoned order, so that we can conclude that he was justified in deleting the addition made by the ld Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Assessing Officer and produce all the evidences of ownership of the properties acquired in F.Y. 1997-98, 2001-02 and also during the year under consideration, so that the Assessing Officer can assess the correct income on the basis of peak theory of the bank account as discussed above. Accordingly, the revenue s appeal is set aside to the Assessing Officer and the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only. We do not find any merit when CIT(A) has deleted the addition on account of rental account, therefore, C.O. of the assessee is dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
