TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1011X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is clear that the basis of adopting 0.5% as the commission income was on the basis of the statement of the assessee himself. However, this statement was not brought to the notice of the Division Bench of this Tribunal - assessee could not rebut the fact that the assessee himself has stated of having received commission in cash @ 0.5% out of which 0.3% was paid as bank charges. We find that the CIT(Appeal) on the basis of this statement has adopted the commission income but he has allowed the expenses on the actual basis - statement cannot be used in part. It is to be read as a whole. Therefore, considering the statement of the assessee we hereby direct the Assessing Officer to adopt 0.20% as the net commission income of the assessee. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. On the basis of AIR information, it was reported that there were cash deposits of Rs. 4,69,54,500/- in the bank account held by the assessee. Therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961( the Act ), after obtaining necessary approval from the Competent Authority and a notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee on 28.3.2018 vide speed post. Further a notice through e-mail was also sent to the assessee. In response to the notice, the authorized representative of the assessee appeared without requisite power of attorney. Before the Assessing Authority it was stated that assessee had filed return of income on 30.08.2012 vide acknowledgment no. 475166640300812 declaring income of Rs. 1,47,200/-. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord and gone through the orders of authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that there were deposits in the bank account of the assessee. The assessee had not offered the amount of commission. Therefore, considering the facts of the present case, there is no infirmity in reopening of the assessment of the assessee. Ground nos. 1 2 of the assessee s appeal are dismissed. 8. Ground nos. 3 4 are against adopting the commission income at 0.5% and the direction to this effect issued by the learned CIT(Appeals) to the assessing authority. 9. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(Appeals) grossly erred in directing the Assessing Officer to adopt the commission income @ 0.5% in contradiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 25 per Rs. 10000 does not hold good in view o the statement of the appellant recorded by the AO on 29.11.2018. It is important to note that Hon ble ITAT relied on statement recorded during the search. Further, the appellant has nowhere disputed the facts stated on oath in the statement dated 29.11.2018 which was duly recorded by the AO. 5.15 Since, the appellant has stated new facts in the statement dated 29.11.2018 regarding commission charges, therefore, by applying the same principle as applied by Hon ble tribunal, the AO is directed to apply 0.5% rate for determination of commission income a against 1% and thereafter allow the expenses on actual basis including bank charges. I do not find any basis of applying 1% commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
