TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he decision cited and relied upon and based on information and analyses of facts supported by evidence and argument we feel that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not granting the relief to the assessee fully. Thus, based on the above discussion the ground no. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. Addition u/s 80C - while filling the return of income he has claimed rebate under section 80C for an amount of Rs. 55,000/- out of which receipts of Rs. 32,653 submitted but while finalizing the assessment the same was not allowed - Even the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed this ground on technical issued and not decided on merits - HELD THAT:- Ongoing through the finding of the ld. CIT(A) it is apparent that he has on technical ground not considered claim of the assessee and even though the proof were filed before him partly. DR submitted that the assessee has not submitted the full claim details and submitted part proof and even at the stage of CIT(A) and submitted that without evidence claim is not allowable. Thus it would be in the interest of justice this evidence be presented to the AO and ld.AO after considering the details and proof of the amount claimed may consider the issue of allowab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Appellate Authority in lake of no additional application placed front of at CIT/ITO under Rule 46A. Whereas has actually paid for payment and request to allow. 3. That the assesse declared business income u/s 44AD on sales 712752/ turnover which worked out to 22.93 greater than 8% under the said section, the same is confirmed by appellate authority CIT(Appeals), Ajmer and same had been deleted by appellate authority CIT(Appeals), Ajmer. 5. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that as AIR information, it is gathered that the assessee has made Cash deposit in his saving bank account during the year under consideration. As such, the assessee has not filed return of income for the year under consideration, therefore, believing that income to the tune of Rs. 11,79,315/- has escaped the assessment, the case was reopened by invoking the provision of section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 after recording the reasons for doing so. In this case, notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 15.03.2016. In response to the said notice, within the stipulated time, neither return of income was filed nor was any written submission filed. The case was then transferred u/s 127 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal show cause notice along with notice u/s 142(1) issued. The assessee filed his written reply in this regard which is reproduced as under: Reply of the assessee in assessment 1. Nature of business of Assessee and source of funds: the nature of business is retail trading of all types of dyes and chemical used to dye cloth in sanganer. 2. Please furnish details of purchase/sale for where the assessee purchase where does he sell the same: The assessee have purchases and sales locally in Jaipur in the relevant assessment year. 3. Please explain the source of cash deposits amounting Rs. 1179315 in SBBJ Durgapura account and also in SBI account of Bajaj Nagar. Does the assessee deposit the sale purchases proceeds in Bank account, if yes where he deposits : the assessee deposits sale proceeds and make payments of purchase from any of both banks savings bank account No. 10125511680 at State Bank of India, A 38, Bajaj Nagar Branch and State bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Durgapura, Tonk Road, Jaipur SB A/C No. 61043846380. The assessee purchase than it is deposited in the bank. Further he have to withdraw cash for domestic uses, if, if excess amount remains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rchase from any of both banks savings Bank Accounts No. 10125511680 at SBI A-38, Bajaj Nagar Branch and SBBJ, Durgapura tonk road Jaipur SB Ac No. 61043846380. The assessee purchases in cash, so he have to withdraw cash, if excess amount remains after purchase that it is deposited in the bank. Further he has to withdraw cash for domestic uses, if excess amount remains than it is also deposited in bank. All outstation payments deposited by the buyers to whom goods sold by the assessee. So, there is no undisclosed income of the assessee. 11. After recording the above submission of the assessee, the ld. AO was of the view that the same is not found tenable. Therefore, to examine the bank account statement and the places from where the cash is deposited throughout the year under consideration. The bank account statement maintained with SBBJ Durgapura is tabulated to have total of all the deposit made in the bank. Ongoing through the details of the said table of cash deposits, it is observed by the AO that the entire cash deposits have been made from out of Jaipur and from many different places/cities. The assessee has contradicted his own submission different occasion and in dif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e year was Rs. 7,12,752/- whereas the total cash deposits are of Rs. 11,79,315/-. The appellant has filed a statement showing source of cash deposits as under: Old debtors realization Rs. 3,68,563/- Cash deposit by own cash Rs. 73,200/- Advance received from debtors Rs. 24,800/- Current years sales Rs. 7,12,752/ The appellant has not furnished any documentary evidences in respect of sources of cash deposit shown as old debtors realization (Rs. 3,68,563), cash deposit by own cash (Rs. 73,200) and advance. received from debtors (Rs. 24,800). Therefore, it is held that source of cash deposits of Rs. 4,66,563/- (Rs. 3,68,563 + Rs. 73,200 + Rs. 24,800) remains unexplained. Hence, out of total addition of Rs. 11,79,3157- made by the AO, addition of Rs. 4,66,563/- is confirmed and remaining addition of Rs. 7,12,752/- is deleted. 15. As the assessee not satisfied with the relief granted by the ld. CIT(A) has filed this appeal before us on the grounds stated in the earlier para. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,563/- could and should not have been doubted, particularly when the authorities below did not make any inquiry and failed to bring any contradictory evidence to negative such claim and submission. Interestingly, the ld. CIT(A) himself has admitted the recovery of cash sales of current year (Rs. 7,12,752/-) made to the same parties common with the current year. 1.2 Old Debtors realisation of Rs. 3,68,563/-(II PB-111-119): On the same analogy of accepting current year sale, when old recovery is made against the outstanding amount of preceding years sales from the parties who are common in current year, there is no reason to doubt the claimed recovery. In absence of any adverse material on record disbelieving the realization of Rs. 3,68,563/-is against the provision of law and also against human probability. When the CIT(A) has accepted the figure of current cash sale realization of Rs. 7.12 of current year, all parties being common from whom the old realization was made should have also been accepted. 1.3 Advance received from debtors of Rs. 24,800/- (II PB 111-119): Similarly, the parties from whom advance is received in current year and they have been billed and acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ward losses - Original assessment was made on 8-10-1984, but on remand, fresh assessment was made on 13-1-1992 - On having found that several drafts had been deposited in bank without mentioning names of parties in corresponding vouchers except name of stations like Calcutta, etc., in some cases, Assessing Officer observed in his original order that assessee was asked to give names and explain nature and source of those deposits but he had failed to do - Assessee filed a reconciliation statement of sundry debtors for a number of years which, inter alia, showed realisations for assessment years 1981-82 to 1984-85 - Assessing Officer in his subsequent order observed that while realisations in any of years 1982- 83 to 1984-85 did not exceed Rs. 5 lakhs, it was unlikely that in current year assessee suddenly had a realisation from sundry debtors amounting to Rs. 18,00,763 He, therefore, held that drafts deposited in bank accounts were actually undisclosed sales of assessee and, accordingly, treated same as assessee's income under section 68 - Whether Assessing Officer, having accepted figure of sundry debtors as on 30-6-1981 to 30-6-1985, could not find fault with figure of sundry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acquisition of assets/shown in balance sheet was not explained - Commissioner (Appeals) held that additions made under section 69 and others were erroneous and unjustified as assessee had explained source of investments - Assessee's case was that once income of civil construction business is estimated under section 44AD, there is no necessity to make separate additions on account of alleged investment inasmuch as the provisions of section 44AD have limited overriding effect over sections 28 to 43CWhether assessee's case could not be accepted Held, yes - Whether, however, since department had not placed any material on record to rebut finding of Commissioner (Appeals), order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) deleting addition made by Assessing Officer was to be upheld - Held yes 17. The ld. AR relying to the written submission further made the oral arguments at the time of hearing and have analyzed written submission before us. The ld. AR filed a detailed submission wherein he has filed a chart showing details in respect of realisation made from the old debtors in the year under consideration at page 1 to 3. As regard the fact that the debtors were outstanding in A. Y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the controversy for the following amount not considered by the ld. CIT(A) and our observation on it; a) Old debtors realization amount of Rs. 3,68,563/- The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the debtors was already established and even admitted by lower authorities below in as much as assessee while filling the return of income for A. Y. 2008-09 just preceding year under consideration. For this he filed the uploaded balance kept in the assessee paper book at page 27. The assessee has also shown page 6 of the paper being the return of income filed at column 3 a)(ii) the same amount of sundry debtor is reflected. Thus, there is no reason accept the version that the assessee has realised its old debtors and the AO should allow this version of the assessee and cash added to that as unexplained income is required to be deleted. a) Cash deposit by own cash Rs. 73,200/- The ld. AR Submitted that the assessee is already in business since 2003. The opening cash available with the assessee as per the balance filed at page 27 of paper book amounts to Rs. 11,485/- and the balance amount considering the size, nature and number of continuing business may be con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed any application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A. I am of the considered view that the case of the appellant is not covered under any Clause of Rule 46A(1). Therefore, the additional evidences furnished by the appellant during the course of appellate proceedings are not admitted. Since, no evidence in support of the deduction claimed under Chapter VI-A was filed before the AO, therefore, the disallowance of the deduction claimed by the appellant under Chapter VI-A made by the AO is hereby confirmed. 22. Before us the ld. AR of the assessee submitted as under: GOA-2: Addition of Rs. 55,000/- u/s 80C (chapter VI A). (CIT para 5 pg. 4 5.) Facts and Submission: The assesse made claim of deduction of Rs. 55,000/- u/s 80C on ount payment ade towards tuition fees and LIC payment, out of which, he was able to produce supporting receipts only up to the extent of Rs. 32,653/- (Kindly refer at a glance chart at PB 46). Whereas the AO is completely silent on this aspect when submission was made, the Id CIT(A) also denied by merely saying that the assesse filed additional evidences in the shape of supporting receipts of LIC premium and tuition fees, but n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
