TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year 2017-18. CIT(A) in assessment year 2013-14, held that considering the facts of the case and history of the appellant s case, the unexplained cash deposits are taken as turnover and profit at the rate of 3.5% is estimate on such turnover. Thus, we note that the Department/Revenue has accepted the claim of the assessee and taxed the turnover @ 3%. Thus, at the cost of repetition we state that there is no change in assessee s facts and circumstances of the present case and assessee s business remain same and facts also remain same, therefore we note that unexplained cash deposit may suffer the tax @ 3.5% on estimated basis. Therefore, we direct the AO to treat amount deposited in the bank account, as a part of assessee`s busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unjustified, invalid and bad in law. 2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the additions of Rs. 83,39,350/- made by the A.O u/s. 69A 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961 (the Act) by wrongly assuming the whole of the turnover of appellant deposited in the bank accounts in the form of cash (Rs. 70,95,115/-) and cheques (Rs. 12,44,235/-) as unexplained money / investments u/s. 69A / 69of the Act, whereas the amounts so deposited were sale proceeds of business of appellant and has been so accepted in past years. The additions so made by ld.AO and sustained by ld. CIT(A) are wrong and unjustified. Appellant prays for deleting the same. 3) Without prejudice to above grounds of appeal, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itions made and sustained are wrong and unjustified and are liable to be deleted. 6) Without prejudice to above grounds of appeal, that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in not directing to ld. AO to give credit of TDS deducted on the interest on FD of Rs. 2,99,988/- added as income of appellant. 7) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the interest charged by ld.AO u/s. 234A and 234B of the Act in respect of above wrong and unjustified additions and wrong and unjustified tax and surcharge levied thereon. 8) Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify any ground of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal. 3. At the outset, Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee has failed to satisfactorily explain the source of cash deposits. Therefore, Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 70,95,115/- u/s. 69A of the Act. The Assessing Officer also held that such income assessed u/s. 69A of the Act should be taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act at the rate of 60%. 6. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer the assessee carried the matter in appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. The ld CIT(A) has considered the findings of the Assessing Officer on merit and reproduced the entire assessment order in his appellate order, vide page nos.4 to 14 of the order of CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) also stated that why the appeal of the assessee should not be dismissed for non-prosecution. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts of M/s R.G. International as turnover and profit has been estimated at the rate of 3.5% of such turnover. Considering the facts of the case and history of the appellant s case, the unexplained cash deposits amounting to Rs. 93,54,000/- are taken as turnover and profit at the rate of 3.5% is estimate on such turnover i.e. Rs. 3,27,390/-(3.5% of Rs. 93,54,000). Therefore, addition of Rs. 3,27,390/- is confirmed and Rs. 90,26,610/- is deleted. In view of the above the grounds of appeal is partly allowed. Therefore, Ld. Counsel contended that the addition can be made @ 3.5% on the cash deposits. The ld Counsel also argued that total amount of Rs. 83,39,350/- was deposited in assessee`s bank account during the whole year. This amount consist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 11. However, ld CIT(A) in assessment year 2013-14, held that considering the facts of the case and history of the appellant s case, the unexplained cash deposits amounting to Rs. 93,54,000/- are taken as turnover and profit at the rate of 3.5% is estimate on such turnover i.e. Rs. 3,27,390/- (3.5% of Rs. 93,54,000). Thus, we note that the Department/Revenue has accepted the claim of the assessee and taxed the turnover @ 3%. 12. Thus, at the cost of repetition we state that there is no change in assessee s facts and circumstances of the present case and assessee s business remain same and facts also remain same, therefore we note that unexplained cash deposit amounting to Rs. 70,95,115/- may suffer the tax @ 3.5% on estimated basis. Theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
