Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Income Tax Officer Ward-34 (3) , New Delhi Versus Shri Devi Dass

2017 (10) TMI 540 - ITAT DELHI

Addition u/s 68 - Held that:- It is an admitted fact that assessee did not attend at many assessment proceedings despite service of notices. However, some proceedings were attended, but adjournment was sought. No explanation was filed with any documentary evidence to explain the cash deposited by assessee in his bank account maintained with ICICI Bank Ltd., The A.O. therefore, passed ex-parte order under section 144 of the I.T. Act. It is, therefore, the duty of the Ld. CIT(A) before granting re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n laid out for claiming benefit of peak credit either before A.O. or before Ld. CIT(A). The assessee admitted before Ld. CIT(A) that cash flow statement is cooked-up document. In view of the above, we find that the matter requires re-consideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). In view of the above discussion, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of ₹ 59,98,975 under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income declaring total income of ₹ 1,45,350. The case was selected on account of AIR information received against the assessee. The A.O. issued various statutory notices. However, despite service of notice, none attended the proceedings before the A.O. Some proceedings were attended, but it was adjourned on the request of the assessee. The A.O. issued notice for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e of any co-operation from the side of the assessee, made the addition of ₹ 66,78,128 on account of undisclosed/unexplained cash deposit under section 68 of the I.T. Act. The assessee challenged the addition before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), however, applying the concept of peak credit, deleted the addition of ₹ 59,98,974. The findings of the Ld. CIT(A) in paras 6 and 7 of the order are reproduced as under : 6. Ground No. 3 is against the addition of ₹ 66,78,128/- u/s 68 of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

more bank account with State Bank of India, Seelampur Branch, Delhi. The appellant had gross receipts of ₹ 33,17,000/- from his business and he had withdrawn ₹ 17,00,000/- approx. from Account No. 3393 and ₹ 16,00,000/- approx. from Account No. 3441. According to the appellant s AR, the deposit of ₹ 66,78,128/- was from his gross receipts from business and cash withdrawals from bank account. Therefore, during the appellate hearing on 22.11.2013, the appellant s AR was ask .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that he maintains no books of account and therefore cash flow statement now submitted is a cooked up document and therefore can be considered only as an afterthought. The fact that even that shows negative cash balance indicates that the appellant is unable to properly explain the cash deposited in his saving banks accounts. 7. The appellant s AR in the written submissions filed on 29.11.2013 had also stated that in ICICI Bank, Preet Vihar Branch a new saving banks account was opened by the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

above evidence the peak credit of the appellant is taken at ₹ 6,79,154/- and this is treated as appellant s undisclosed income u/s 68 of the I T Act against the addition of ₹ 66,78,128/- made by the A.O. Thus, the appellant gets a relief of ₹ 59,98,974/- (6678128 - 679154) and the addition of ₹ 6,79,154/- only is sustained. Therefore, the ground no. 3 is partly allowed. 3. We have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the findings of the authorities below. However, none appeared .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

idered the submissions of the Ld. D.R. and are in agreement with the contention of the Ld. D.R. that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). It is an admitted fact that assessee did not attend at many assessment proceedings despite service of notices. However, some proceedings were attended, but adjournment was sought. No explanation was filed with any documentary evidence to explain the cash deposited by assessee in his bank account maintained with ICICI Bank Ltd., T .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version