9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 920X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19,48,71,150/- during the F.Y. 2010-2011 relating to the A.Y. 2011-2012 and has not filed its return of income. Therefore, the A.O. recorded the reasons for reopening of the case under section 147 and notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act was issued on 31.03.2018. There was no response to the said notice issued under section 148. There was also no compliance to the statutory notice issued under section 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The A.O, therefore, completed the assessment under section 144/147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by estimating the profit rate of 0.5% on the commodity transaction of Rs. 19,48,71,150/- and made addition of Rs. 9,74,355/- to the total income of the assessee. In otherwords, the A.O. determined the total income at Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposit of margin money of Rs. 5,00,075/ but Ld. CIT(A) made the addition of flimsy ground, surmises and conjecture only. 6. That there was no "nexus" between the primary facts & "belief" for reopenment. 7. That the addition was made on mere surmise ignoring relevant material & was based on irrelevant material & moreover the assessment was made without grant of a proper opportunity of being heard & without following rules of natural justice. 8. The appeal craves leave to amend or delete any of the above ground of appeal." 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee referred to Para 7.5 of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) has asked the assessee to furnish details of cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned assessment year and had not filed its return of income. Since the assessee neither responded to the notice issued under section 148 nor responded to the notice issued under section 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, therefore, the A.O. estimated the profit @ 0.5% of Rs. 19,48,71,150/- and added an amount of Rs. 9,74,355/- to the total income of the assessee under section 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961 as undisclosed cash deposit in the Bank account. I find the Ld. CIT(A) found that there is no such cash deposit, for which, he deleted the same. However, since the assessee could not explain the details of margin money of Rs. 5,00,075/-, he sustained the same, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. It is the sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
