9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 558X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had filed petition seeking condonation of delay wherein the reasons for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit was explained. For reference, the relevant portion from the affidavit is extracted herein below:- "......... The order of the Commissioner was received on 23/08/2016 and within a week days' time the same was handed over to Sri S.S. Chary to an employee of V. Malyal & Co Chartered Accountants, to bring it to the notice of Authorized Representative of the assessee CA, M.V. Raja Shekar Rao. It appears that the staff members were busy with the audit work of their clients and the order was not brought to the notice of Sri M.V. Raja Shekhar Rao and it remained misplaced till a show cause letter was received from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, in the interest of justice, I hereby condone the delay of 544 days in the filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 4. The assessee has raised several grounds in his appeal however, the crux of the issue is that the assessee is aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) for having confirmed the order of the Ld. AO wherein he had made addition in the hands of the assessee for Rs. 12,83,408/- by holding that the cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee are from undisclosed source. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a resident individual engaged in the business of running a wine shop as a partner in the firm. The assessee filed his return of income for the AY 2005-06 on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duce the books of accounts of M/s. Shri Shakthi Wines and did not reconcile the bank account with the accounts of the firm before the Ld.AO. Further, the assessee did not produce the bank statement and other relevant documents to establish the genuineness of the bank deposit of Rs. 12,83,408/-. Therefore, the Ld. AO added the amount of Rs. 12,83,408/- as the unexplained investment in the bank account maintained by the assessee in UTI Bank Ltd. On appeal, the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the order of the Ld. AO after obtaining a remand report from the Ld.AO and after elaborate consideration because even after providing sufficient opportunities the assessee had failed to furnish the books of accounts of M/s. Shri Shakthi Wines and reconcile the bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. AR. However, from the facts of the case it is also apparent that the assessee does not have any other substantial source of income other than from the running of the Wines Shop as a partner in M/s. Shri Shakthi Wines. Therefore, the cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee can be safe presumed to be from the sale proceeds of the firm. However, the Revenue has also shown laxity by not obtaining the statement from the UTI bank with respect to the transactions made by the assessee. In this situation, it will not be fair to treat the entire cash deposits of Rs. 12,83,408/- as the unaccounted income of the assessee as it can be reasonably construed to represent as the undisclosed turnover of the firm in which the assessee is a part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
