Appeal delay condoned; income adjustment for undisclosed cash deposits; cooperation urged in assessment proceedings.

The delay in filing the appeal due to illness was condoned by the Appellate Tribunal. The addition of cash deposits in bank accounts led to an income adjustment as the assessee failed to explain the sources adequately. Despite submitting additional evidence, the CIT(A) found the explanations unsatisfactory and directed consideration of peak credits. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the AO for fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for cooperation from the assessee. The Tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate with the AO in providing necessary details for the assessment proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal due to illness.
2. Addition of cash deposits in bank accounts.
3. Rejection of explanation regarding sources of cash deposits.
4. Consideration of peak credits in bank accounts.
5. Non-cooperation of the assessee with the assessing officer.

Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal due to illness
The appeal was delayed by 39 days due to the illness of the assessee's wife. The delay was supported by medical certificates and discharge certificates. The Appellate Tribunal considered the submissions and objections, concluding that there was a reasonable cause for the delay, and thus, the delay was condoned.

Issue 2: Addition of cash deposits in bank accounts
The Assessing Officer found that the assessee made significant deposits in two bank accounts jointly held with another individual. Despite several notices and opportunities to explain the sources of these deposits, the assessee did not respond. Consequently, the AO made an addition to the income based on these deposits.

Issue 3: Rejection of explanation regarding sources of cash deposits
The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) and submitted additional evidence in the form of a cash flow statement. However, the CIT(A) found the explanations unsatisfactory, as the sources of various credits and debits were not adequately explained. The CIT(A) directed the AO to consider peak credits from specific bank accounts for the addition.

Issue 4: Consideration of peak credits in bank accounts
The assessee appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that all three bank accounts should be considered, not just two as directed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal observed discrepancies in the cash flow statement and the lack of proper explanations for deposits and withdrawals. They set aside the issue and remitted it back to the AO for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for cooperation from the assessee.

Issue 5: Non-cooperation of the assessee with the assessing officer
The Tribunal noted the lack of cooperation from the assessee in providing details and explanations regarding the bank transactions. They directed the assessee to submit the necessary details and cooperate with the AO in the fresh assessment proceedings.

In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remitted back to the AO for a fresh assessment considering all bank accounts and requiring the assessee's cooperation.

---