TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owever, neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has considered the same properly as to what is the extent of cash withdrawn from the bank account so as to enable the assessee to re-deposit the same after meeting his personal expenses, etc. - there are various other investments and deposits made by the assessee out of the said bank account - matter needs fresh adjudication by the AO. He shall also verify the past and subsequent records as to whether the assessee is opting for presumptive tax u/s. 44AF - AO is directed to verify the total cash withdrawals from the said bank account and after taking into account reasonable personal expenses and investments, etc., may consider the benefit of redeposit in the bank account from the said cash withdrawals. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urce of cash deposit. It was further submitted that cash was deposited and withdrawn to show huge transactions for obtaining loan. However, the AO did not accept the arguments advanced by the assessee. He noted that the assessee has deposited cash, but, there are no substantial withdrawals to justify the huge cash deposits. The assessee could not prove with evidence to his satisfaction that the deposits are out of business receipts. The AO, therefore, made addition of ₹ 29,85,045/- to the total income of the assessee on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account. Since the AO had made the addition on account of unexplained cash deposit, he did not make any separate addition on account of the following payments from the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een served on 22.03.2017. Considering these facts, I find no force in the contention of the ld. AR, that there is legal infirmity in taking approval of the competent authority as it is not borne out of the facts available on the assessment record. Thus, Ground No. 1 is accordingly dismissed. All the other grounds relates to addition of ₹ 29,85,045/- which has been dealt with hereunder: I have considered the rival contention of the AO and the AR of the appellant. The AO as made addition of ₹ 29,85,045/- by depending upon on a specific provision of law wherein, as per section 139(9)(f) assessee is required to furnish the amount of gross receipts, gross profit, expenses and net profit of the business or profession and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of section 139(9)(f) of the IT Act and has not provided the requisite detail either during assessment or during the present appeal proceedings. It is pertinent to note, that the AO has recorded a finding regarding unexplained investment and household drawings of ₹ 15,55,745/- for which he has not made any separate addition in the assessment order. In such a situation the correctness of business profit being declared u/s. 44AF loses its relevance when it is apparent from the record that the assessee has made investment to the tune of ₹ 15,55,745/- and this fact has not been disputed by the appellant in appeal. However to be fair to the assessee, I direct the AO to reduce the 5% of income already offered unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the A.O. is in error in making addition of ₹ 29,58,045/- treated as unexplained income and CIT(A) is in error not following the earlier order, which is confirmed by the Hon'ble I.T.A.T. (on tax effect) 4. That the assessee has right to add, modify or delete any ground during the appeal proceeding. 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO as well as upholding the validity of reassessment. So far as the validity of reassessment proceedings is concerned, he submitted that although the AO has mentioned that notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 17th March, 2017 and served on 22nd March, 2017, however, nowhere it is mentioned that approva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... presumptive tax u/s. 44AF and the cash withdrawal on different occasions have been re-deposited in the sand bank account to show higher turnover for obtaining loan from the bank. A perusal of the bank account shows that on certain dates, there are substantial cash withdrawals. However, neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has considered the same properly as to what is the extent of cash withdrawn from the bank account so as to enable the assessee to re-deposit the same after meeting his personal expenses, etc. Further, there are various other investments and deposits made by the assessee out of the said bank account. Therefore, in my opinion, the matter needs fresh adjudication by the AO. He shall also verify the past and subsequent records as to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
