TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch business activities from where the assessee generated the credit found in the bank account. Therefore, 7% of total addition is considered as profit from such business activities. Accordingly, the AO is directed to consider 7% of total deposit. Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in Smt. Krushangi Keyur Bhagat [ 2018 (9) TMI 2093 - ITAT SURAT] almost on similar set of facts wherein cash credit was found credited in the bank account of that assessee, the assessee took plea before lower authorities that transaction in bank account pertained to her textile business. Assessee claimed that only peak credit appearing in the bank account should be considered which was not accepted and the amount after reducing the cheque deposits, remaining was treated as unexplained. On appeal before Tribunal, the plea of assessee that amount credited in the bank was a part of textile business and only profit element @ 5% of total deposit including of credit by way of cheque was considered as a profit element on the total deposits. Considering the fact of the case and the legal view taken by Hon ble High Court as well as by Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal, WE direct the AO to restrict the addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the turnover of Rs.9,79,130/-. The Ld. AO has added the same income twice without any evidence and without considering the nature of business of the assessee. The assessee has also withdrawn the cash of Rs. 13,90,000/- form the bank account which was not taken into the consideration by the AO. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. AO has erred in issuing a demand notice under section 156 of the Act demanding a sum of Rs9,52,980/-which included interest of Rs.3,01,506/- under section 234B of the Act. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has not provided the ample opportunities to hear the case, hence the case may please be allowed and set aside to the CIT(A), Surat.] 9. It is therefore prayed that the above addition may please be deleted as learned members of the tribunal may deem it proper. 10. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of the hearing of the appeal. 2. Perusal of record shows that the impugned order was passed by the ld. NFAC/CIT(A) on 02 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declaring income of Rs. 1,74,543/-. Copy of reasons recorded were provided to the assessee. In response to show cause notice, the assessee stated that he is engaged in the business of Lapsi as his family business. The assessee has deposited cash of sale consideration in his bank account. The submission of assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has not furnished cash book and details of sales and purchase of goods. The assessee failed to establish the business in absence of any documentary evidence, therefore, an amount of Rs. 14,46,181/- was added as an unexplained investment under Section 69 while passing the assessment order on 03/12/2019. 7. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the addition was confirmed. The ld. CIT(A) while confirming the additions held that during the appellate stage, the assessee failed to justify the cash deposit during the relevant assessment period. The assessee has not submitted any documentary evidence regarding business of Lapsi. No books of account were furnished. The assessee has not proved the genuineness of source of cash deposits. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness as claimed, the entire deposits in the bank account is net profit of the assessee. 12. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. I find that the during the assessment, the Assessing officer made addition of aggregate of cash as well as cheque deposit in the bank account of assessee. The ld. CIT(A), confirmed the additions by taking a view that assessee has not filed any evidence to substantiate that assessee was doing business of Lapsi . Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee vehemently submitted that assessee was doing a business of Lapsi on very small scale. The family of assessee is in this traditional business, inherited from his predecessors and that the deposits made in the bank accounts are part of sale proceed or transaction of family business of Lapsi. I find that pattern of deposits in bank account shows that there are certain cheque deposits, deposits in cash and regular withdrawal of amount. The lower authorities have confirmed the entire aggregate of deposits and have not considered the withdrawal. I am of the view that entire amount of deposits cannot be considered for addition. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
