TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 467X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of Section 44AD. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Leader Valves Ltd. [ 2007 (1) TMI 70 - HIGH COURT, PUNJAB AND HARYANA] observed that in view the principle of consistency, the Revenue could not be permitted to raise an issue in isolation only for one year in the case of one assessee, while accepting the findings on the same issue in the case of other assesses and for other years in the case of assessee. The department cannot be permitted to raise an issue in isolation only for immediately succeeding on identical facts in the case of the same assessee. Thus, the source of amount of credit in the assessee s bank account stands explained as milk sale Turn Over for the Assessment Year under consideration. As per provisions of section 44AD of the Act, the AO is directed to apply 8% Net profit on the total milk sale of worth. Appeal of the assessee is allowed - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal For the Respondent : Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR ORDER PER DR. M. L. MEENA, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has not brought on record any evidence to substantiate the source of cash deposits in the bank account. As per the reply filed by the Ld. Counsel, the assessee is a Granthi and Mukhya Sewadar of Gurdwara. The assessee has not brought on record any evidence to explain the source of cash deposits during the year. In view of these facts, the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are dismissed. 6. The counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) did not appreciate the facts on record as regards the source of amount of credit in the assessee s bank account which are self-explanatory. He, further submitted that in the earlier assessment year, the ld. CIT(A) has accepted the source of identical cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee which has been accepted by the department. In support, he has filed a paper book pgs. 1 to 77 besides synopsis. The Relevant part is reproduced as under: On merits, it is submitted that in response to notice u/s 148, the assessee had filed the return of income declaring income from sale of Milk and interest on FDR etc. as per computation of Income had been disclosed at pages 1 to 2 of the Paper Book and, in fact, in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to be maintained. The Reliance is being placed on the following judgments:- a. CIT Vs/ Dalmia Dadri Cement Ltd. (1970) 77 ITR 410 (P H) Held also, that though as a general rule the principle of res judicata is not applicable to decisions of income tax authorities and an assessment for a particular year is final and conclusive between the parties only in relation to the assessment for that year and the decisions given in an assessment for an earlier year are not binding either on the assessee or the department in a subsequent year, this rule is subject to limitations, for there should be finality and certainty in all litigations including litigation arising out of the Income Tax Act and an earlier decision on the same question cannot be reopened . b. Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs CIT (2004) 266 ITR 99 (SC) If the Revenue has not challenged the correctness of the law laid down by the High Court and has accepted it in the case of one assessee, then it is not open to the Revenue to challenge its correctness in the case of other assesses, without just cause . Here in the present case in assessee s own case, the view has been taken by CIT(A) and ITAT since the D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... promoted public interest as provided in proviso to section 2(15)- Merely because assessee charged for certain goods and services, activities not commercial activities- Onus on Department to prove assessee had profit motive in such activities- Principle of consistency - Finding that there was no change in nature of activities of assessee from earlier years- Assessee charitable organization and entitled to benefit. i. DCIT Vs Marigold Premises Pvt. Ltd. as reported 83 ITR (Trib.) 32 (Pune) Development, maintenance and operation of industrial park- Special deduction - Claim for first year disallowed and appeal at assesse s instance pending before High Court- Claim for five subsequent years allowed by Assessing Officer- Claim in respect of immediately preceding assessment year rejected by Assessing Officer but allowed by Commissioner (Appeals)- Rule of consistency- Facts identical- Deduction to be allowed- Income-tax Act, 1961, s. 80-IA(4)(iii) It is, therefore, very humbly requested that the addition as sustained by the Ld.CIT(A) may, please, be deleted and oblige. 7. The Ld. DR although supported the impugned order, however, he has not filed any material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
