9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1460X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cond is an appeal against levy of penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ''the Act'') for the same year. 3. Facts apropos are that assessee had filed his return for the impugned assessment year declaring income of Rs. 11,14,850/- comprising salary of Rs. 2,70,000/- and house property income of Rs. 8,44,850/-. Ld. Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings, examined the bank accounts of the assessee and found that there were two bank accounts, one with M/s. Bank of India and other with Central Bank of India, which carried following cash/ clearing credits. (a) Cash credits in A/c No.8012101 10000477 with Bank of India: Rs.22,47,000 (b) Clearing credits in A/c No.801210110000477 with Bank of India ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA 968/Mds/2014, dated 4.02.2015 remitted the issues back to the ld. CIT(A) with the following observations. ''We have heard rival contentions and perused the records. Admittedly, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has passed impugned order on the basis of material available on record, without hearing the assessee. We noticed that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has given more than one opportunity to the assessee to furnish materials called for by him. However, the assessee failed to furnish the same and hence the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) was constrained to pass order. At the same time, we find some merit in the plea of the learned Authorised Representative. Hence, in the interest of just ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usiness income which was not at all originally shown in return fled on 21.05.2010. The same was processed u/s. 143(l) on 09.11.2011. Had there been no scrutiny proceedings, no revised statements of income were to have filed. This revised statement is after thought. The issue, to be considered here, is explained credits in banks, repayment of loans without explaining the source for repayment In these circumstances, it is submitted that it was not ignorance on the part of AO to consider revised memo but non compliance on the part of the assessee to furnish evidences in support of claim during the assessment proceedings wherein the assessee was based to do so. B) Cash credits Rs. 30,94,295/- peak credit has been worked out by the assessee at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its in Bank account Rs,30,94,295 Clearing deposit in Bank account Rs.71,35,217 Amounts received from Baba Foundation Ltd. Rs .40,25,000 Rs.142,54,512 Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the ld. AO on unexplained cash credits and unexplained repayment of loan and instead made an addition of Rs. 11,40,360/- being income estimated at the rate of 8% on civil construction contract receipts of Rs. 1,42,54,512/-. However, apart from this, ld. CIT(A) also arrived at a finding that assessee would have invested a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- as initial investment in its business and sum of Rs. 28,00,000/- for funding its working capital repayment. For estimating the working capital required ld. CIT(A) relied on the accounts of M/s. Baba F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to carry on the business. The appellant has not maintained any books of accounts. In the case of Baba Foundation Ltd. the working capital is 23% of the turnover, as per the Balance Sheet furnished by the appellant. Taking the same ratio, the undisclosed investment in working capital by the appellant is estimated at Rs. 28 Iakhs (20% of Rs. 142,54,512) which includes cash of Rs. 4 lakhs and other net receivables of Rs. 24 lakhs. Thus, the appellants undisclosed investment in civil construction business disclosed for the first time is determined at Rs. 28 lakhs." We find that asseessee is not in appeal against estimation of 8% on its receipts of Rs. 1,42,54,512/-, as income from civil construction business. Once an addition on estimate b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und and say that such addition ought not have been made by the ld. CIT(A). Assessee cannot plead for telescoping of admitted income with what is found by the Assessing authority to be undisclosed income. We thus do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Grounds 4 and 5 of the assessee stand dismissed. 16. Now we take up the appeal of the assessee against levy of penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act. Its plea is that there was no concealment, since the income was arrived at estimated basis. 17. We have heard the rival contentions carefully. It is true that the income of the assessee was arrived on an estimated basis. However, assessee in its original return of income had shown only income from salary and income fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
