TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as escaped assessment. Thus, this argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee is dismissed as devoid of merit and the re-opening of assessment is upheld. The second argument that, no addition has been made on the issue on which the assessment was reopened and hence the other addition which have no relation or nexus with the reasons recorded are bad in law, the assessment was reopened on the ground that there was cash deposits of ₹ 89,10,640/-, in one savings bank account maintained in Canara bank, Siliguri Branch and that no evidence was produced by the assessee in support of the contentions that these deposits were out of sale proceeds of cigarettes. AO has come to a conclusion that the undisclosed cash receipts was ₹ 48,82 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Income-Tax Officer vs Kenaram Saha And Subhash Saha (2008 (3) TMI 350 - ITAT CALCUTA) we uphold the contention of the assessee that, once the books of account have been rejected and the net profit has been estimated as a percentage of turnover by AO, no further additions on account of unverifiable expenditure and of items claimed in the profit and loss account etc., can be made. Gross receipts from M/s. Godfrey Philips (I) Ltd., cannot be treated as income of the assessee. Such action is against the facts of the case. Hence, this argument of the assessee is upheld and the addition estimated at 2 per cent of the turnover as determined by the Assessing Officer, is sustained. The balance of the additions are hereby deleted. - Decided part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... challenged the reopening of assessment by submitting that, there is no allegation that there is escapement of income, in the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. He relied on case-law, which we would be referring in due course, for the proposition that the Assessing Officer should expressly record, in his reasons for reopening, that income subject to tax has escaped assessment and the reasons, have to be read as it is, and nothing should be added or substituted. 3.1. He further argued that no addition, whatsoever, was made in the Assessment Order, on the issues on which the reasons were recorded for reopening the assessments and that under such circumstances, the other additions made on issues which are not connected with the reas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Assessing Officer to take the business income of the assessee at ₹ 14,42,828/-. He relied on the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, we hold as below:- The reasons recorded for reopening are brought out at page 3 of the assessment order, which is extracted for ready reference.:- In this case information in writing is passed to the undersigned by the Incometax Officer (Intelligence Criminal Investigation), Hakimpara, Siliguri that the assessee during the F.Y. 2010 had made cash deposits of ₹ 89,10,640/- in one saving bank account no. 2432101004623 since maintained by her in Canara Bank, Siliguri Branch, However, the assessee had violated the provisions of Section 139A(5) by n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppressed. Though the wording escaped assessment has not been used, the sum and substance of the reasons demonstrate that the assessing officer had reason to believe based on the tangible material that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Thus, this argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee is dismissed as devoid of merit and the re-opening of assessment is upheld. 6.1. The second argument is that, no addition has been made on the issue on which the assessment was reopened and hence the other addition which have no relation or nexus with the reasons recorded are bad in law. The assessment was reopened on the ground that there was cash deposits of ₹ 89,10,640/-, in one savings bank account maintained in Canara bank, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6.250/-. Out of this, display and scheme receipts, was a figure of ₹ 55,57,483/-. The surplus from the same was ₹ 22,39,198/-, after meeting the expenses. This was credited to the Profit Loss Account of the assessee under the head Display Scheme receipts. Under the head Distribution of Subsidy , the assessee received credit notes of ₹ 17,83,767/-. The surplus from this account was ₹ 2,34,350/-, after expenses. This was credited to the profit and loss account under the head Miscellaneous Income . These facts and figures have not been controverted by the ld. D/R. 6.3. Be it as it may, the books of account of the assessee have been rejected and this issue has not been challenged before us. Under these circums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
