TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 435X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally when the assessee is a small trader. Since the peak credit comes to ₹ 7,70,390/-, therefore, modify the order of the CIT(A) and restrict the addition to ₹ 7,70,390/-. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly partly allowed. - ITA No.3314/Del/2019 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2020 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Neeraj Mangal, And Shri Gourav Bansal, CAs For the Revenue : Shri D.S. Yadav, DR ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28th February, 2019 of the CIT(A)-19, New Delhi, relating to the A.Y. 2015-16. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. That the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO and the appellate order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 6. That the addition of ₹ 22,16,710 made under Section 69A of the Act to the income of the assessee is not tenable under the facts of the case because additions are made in gross ignorance of the fact that the cash deposited in the bank account was either withdrawn and re-deposited or utilized for making purchases. 7. The appellate craves leave to add/ alter/ modify or delete any ground of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 23rd February, 2017 declaring the total income at ₹ 2,69,900/- . During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore me in appeal, the appellant came forward with a plea that the entire credits of ₹ 35,36,835/- (cash deposits and ₹ 32,59,950/- and other credits ₹ 3,06,885/-), be treated as sales of the appellant. The appellant prayed that his gross profit rate of 20.89% be treated as income. In this case, I find that the appellant has not been able to prove the fact of purchases or sales. Even before me, no evidence regarding sale or purchase was presented. As such, the entire credits in the bank account have remained unexplained. Thereafter, I am left with no alternative but to confirm the A.O s findings. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The ld. Counsel for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition of ₹ 22,16,710/- which was upheld by the CIT(A). It is the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has shown a GP rate of 20.89% and, therefore, the same rate should be applied to the entire deposits since such deposits are nothing, but, suppressed turnover. It is the alternate contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that only the peak credit should be added and not the entire deposits in the bank account since the corresponding withdrawals from the said bank account have not been considered. A perusal of the deposit and withdrawals in the said bank account filed by the assessee shows that there are systematic deposits as well as withdrawals. The assessee is engaged in the business of readymade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
