9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia, Gulbarga totaling Rs. 1,16,80,800. The assessee was asked to explain the source of funds out of which the cash deposits were made in the bank account. The assessee tried to explain that the cash deposits were out of previous withdrawals from the very same bank account, receipts from sub-contract work carried out by the assessee, agricultural income of assessee and agricultural income of father and other relatives. The assessee could not produce any evidence to substantiate the claim made by him as aforesaid. In the circumstances, the AO treated the unexplained deposits in the bank account as receipts from undisclosed business transactions and applied the profit earned by the assessee in his disclosed contract business which was 12.92% ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposits are made into his bank account. The addition made by the AO was accordingly confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). 4. The assessee, aggrieved by the order of CIT(Appeals), has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee reads as follows:- "1. The order of Hon'ble CIT(A) is bad in law and without considering the fact of the case. 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in not considering and corelating the withdrawals with deposits in the bank statement. In the case of ITO Vs Shri Rajeev Kumar Gupta ITA No 273/Agra/2013, it was held that entire deposits made in the bank account cannot be said to be unexplained, because after deposit of cash amounts, there are withdrawals. 3. Appellant craves ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04-06-2013 1,00,000 08-02-2014 5,00,000 05-06-2013 85,000 24-02-2014 1,00,000 08-06-2013 1,00,000 10-03-2014 1,00,000 20-06-2013 3,00,000 17-03-2014 2,00,000 20-06-2013 1,00,000 21-03-2014 60,000 Total (A) 18,00,000 Total (B) 29,20,000 Cash Withdrawals with Bank of India A/c 848510100006664: 07-10-2013 1,00,000 09-10-2013 30,000 . 21-11-2013 22,00,000 02-12-2013 9,50,000 05-12-2013 6,50,000 27-03-2014 1,00,000 Total (C) 40,30,000/- Total Withdrawal (A)+(B)+(C) 87,50,000/- (18,00,000+29,20,000+40,30,000) 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that to the extent of Rs. 87,50,000, source of deposit of cash in the bank account shoul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition to be made would be much greater than what the AO has made in the assessment proceedings. 8. We are of the view that the assessee cannot choose peak credit theory to delete a part of the addition and also plead for applying net rate on the remaining portion of the unexplained deposits in the bank account. Doing so will be mutually contradictory. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the AO has made a reasonable estimate of income of the assessee in respect of unexplained deposits in the bank account by treating them as receipts from undisclosed or unrecorded business transactions. The CIT(Appeals) has rightly confirmed the order of AO. We find no grounds to interfere with the order of CIT(Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
