TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Unexplained cash deposits treated as commission earnings at 0.15% rate under section 68 for entry operator</h1> The ITAT Delhi held that where an assessee could not substantiate the source of cash deposits treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68, but ... Computation of commission income on credit entries - Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - assessee could not substantiate the source of cash deposits - assessee argued that the assessee has only earned commission income on the entries provided by him whether in cash or by in any other mode and he has withdrawn around Rs. 6 Crores in cash from one account and hence the amount of cash credit should not be treated as unaccounted money being part of business of accommodation entry HELD THAT:- We find that the similar issue has been adjudicated by this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the earlier and subsequent assessment years [2022 (7) TMI 1515 - ITAT DELHI] wherein the Tribunal having treated the assessee as a Entry Operator determined commission @0.15%, hence keeping in view the said order, we direct the AO charge commission @0.15% on the amount of Rs. 160,10,097/-. Issues:1. Addition of commission income earned by the assessee.2. Addition of unexplained cash credit in the bank accounts.3. Treatment of cash deposits in the bank accounts as unexplained.Analysis:Issue 1 - Commission Income:The appellant challenged the addition of commission income by the Assessing Officer. The appellant contended that the commission was earned on transactions with M/s Chaudhary and Co. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, stating that the appellant failed to provide satisfactory evidence regarding contra entries and the nature of the transactions. The ITAT referred to previous judgments and directed the AO to charge commission at 0.15% on the disputed amount, partially allowing the appeal.Issue 2 - Unexplained Cash Credit:The Assessing Officer added Rs. 1,60,10,097 as unexplained cash credit in the appellant's bank accounts. The appellant could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the source of these deposits. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, emphasizing the lack of documentary evidence linking withdrawals and deposits. The ITAT affirmed the decision, considering the cash as unexplained credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.Issue 3 - Cash Deposits in M/s. Chaudhary & Co.:An amount of Rs. 2,20,82,091 was deposited in the bank account of M/s. Chaudhary & Co. The Assessing Officer treated this as unexplained cash credit. The CIT(A) noted the lack of justification for the cash movements between accounts and upheld the addition. The ITAT partially allowed the appeal, directing the AO to charge commission at 0.15% on the deposited amount, considering the appellant's admission of operating the firm.Additional Findings:The Assessing Officer also added commission income earned from credit entries in the bank accounts, totaling Rs. 32,40,621. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, and the ITAT upheld the decision, dismissing the appeal. Furthermore, commission income of Rs. 7,68,321 earned from transactions with M/s. Chaudhary & Co. was added to the appellant's income, a decision affirmed by the ITAT.Conclusion:The appeal was partly allowed concerning the commission income calculations but dismissed regarding other additions. Ground 5 was not pressed, and the overall decision favored the revenue authorities.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
