9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). Subsequently, proceedings were initiated under section 147 of the Act and the Assessing Officer (AO) states that after recording reasons, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 29.02.2012. In response thereto, the assessee filed a return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 on 22.03.2012 and scrutiny assessment proceedings were taken up by issue of statutory notices under section 143(2)/142(1) of the Act and questionnaire calling for details from the assessee. The AO observed that inspite of many opportunities afforded to the assessee, complete details as required by the questionnaire were not filed and therefore the assessee was issued a show cause notice on 01.03.2013 requiring him ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellate proceedings also, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal exparte vide impugned order dated 23.09.2014. While doing so, he was of the view that the AO ought not to have made the said addition under section 68 of the Act and being of the opinion that the provisions of section 69A of the Act are attracted in the case on hand, directed the AO to treat the amount of Rs. 27,10,812/- being credit in ICICI Bank, Khar (W), Mumbai as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. 3.1 Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A)-33, Mumbai dated 23.09.2014 for A.Y. 2009-10, the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds: - "1) Ld. CIT(A) failed in confirming action of Assessing Officer taxing depos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned D.R. for Revenue who was present and ready to argue Revenue's case. 3.3.1 We have heard the learned D.R. for Revenue and perused and carefully considered the material on record. The grounds raised by the assessee at S.No. 1 to 4 (supra) challenge the action of the learned CIT(A) in upholding the AO's action in taking the deposits of Rs. 27,10,812/- in the assessee's hands without appreciating that the source of deposits in the ICICI Savings Bank Account at Kher (W), Mumbai were receipts from/ related to business transactions and out of cash withdrawals which were shown in the cash statement. In the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) has considered and dealt with this issue at paras 6.1 to6.5 of the impugned order as under: - 6.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n that assessee's residence and the current account with cosmos bank from where generally the business is operated are in Vashi whereas the impugned bank account with ICICI bank is in Khar. Even in PAN database against office address, the address mentioned is 3-4, B-10/55, Sector-15, Vashi, Navi Mumbai 400 703. 6.3 The main plank of appellant's argument in statement of facts is that being a reseller of garments, he had declared more than what is required to be shown u/s 44AF of the Act. That section 44AF is a presumptive scheme of computation of taxation and by which the assessee need not maintain books of accounts. That is fact was overlooked by the A.O. and proceeded to tax full credit u/s 68 of the Act. 6.4 I have considered this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
