9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 528X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the appellant in limine without discussing the issues on merits which is in gross violation of provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act which mandate the Commissioner to pass a reasoned order. (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in confirming the addition of Rs. 20,04,571/- under Section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credits without there being any discussion or findings in the order under challenge. (iii) Alternatively and without prejudice, whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in not allowing set off of share trading business loss of Rs. 30,36,815/- against cash credit addition of Rs. 20,04,571/- unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0.36 lakhs (rounded off). She, therefore, requested that such loss be considered while calculating her total income for the year under consideration. She produced the copy of Profit & Loss account and Balance Sheet for the said business along with other supporting documents. 2.2 In the order of assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that in the return filed, the assessee had not shown the details of the bank account of ICICI bank. It was thus clear that she had maintained an undisclosed bank account and deposited unaccounted income in such account. She had failed to explain the source of amounts credited by cheques. As regards the cash deposit of Rs. 19,96,500/-, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had failed to disclose the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirmed the view of the Revenue authorities and dismissed the assessee's appeal making following observations: "6. I have considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 1 of Section 71 contemplates that where the net result of computation made for any assessment year in respect of any head of income, is a loss, the same can be set off against the income from other heads. Similarly, in the case of K.R. Automobiles (supra), the Tribunal has allowed set off income against the loss. The Tribunal has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shilpa Dyeing & Printing Mills P. Ltd., (2013) 39 taxmann.com 3 (Guj). As far as proposition of law is concerned, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 20 lakhs and also claimed to have traded in shares by sale and purchase of shares through such account despite which no mention was made in the return filed for the current year and in the earlier years. There was thus clear attempt on the part of the assessee to withhold her bank account and the transactions recorded therein. The assessee had offered no explanation about non disclosure of the bank account in the return filed for the current year and in the earlier years. In this very account, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had made cash deposits of more than Rs. 20 lakhs and the explanation offered by the assessee was found to be unacceptable. The cash gifts of Rs. 17 lakhs and odd was not backed by any supporting docume ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
