CIT(A) correctly applied 1.2% net profit rate on cash deposits instead of treating entire amount as unexplained income under Section 69A

ITAT Jodhpur upheld CIT(A)'s decision to admit additional evidence under Rule 46A of IT Rules and delete additions made by AO regarding unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A. The appellant claimed deposits were sale proceeds from bullion trading business earning 1% commission. CIT(A) correctly applied net profit rate of 1.2% on total deposits instead of treating entire amount as income. ITAT found CIT(A)'s approach judicious and reasonable, rejecting both department's objection to additional evidence admission and assessee's appeal against NP rate application.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of notice u/s 148 and assessment u/s 144/147.
2. Reduction of addition on account of unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A.
3. Admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules.
4. Estimation of net profit rate (NP rate) on total deposits.

Summary:

1. Validity of Notice u/s 148 and Assessment u/s 144/147:
The assessee challenged the validity of the notice issued u/s 148 and the subsequent assessment u/s 144/147, claiming it was void ab initio. The CIT(A) confirmed the validity of the reopening of the assessment u/s 147.

2. Reduction of Addition on Account of Unexplained Cash Deposits u/s 69A:
The AO treated the entire deposits of Rs. 4,43,07,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A. The CIT(A) reduced this addition to Rs. 5,31,684/-, applying a net profit rate of 1.2% on the total deposits, considering them as sales proceeds from the assessee's bullion trading business. The Tribunal upheld this reduction, agreeing with the CIT(A)'s application of the NP rate and the partial relief granted to the assessee.

3. Admission of Additional Evidence under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules:
The CIT(A) admitted additional evidence under Rule 46A, which the AO had objected to. The CIT(A) found that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence during the assessment proceedings. The Tribunal supported this decision, noting that the additional evidence was crucial for a fair adjudication of the case.

4. Estimation of Net Profit Rate (NP Rate) on Total Deposits:
The CIT(A) applied an NP rate of 1.2% on the total deposits, treating them as sales, to estimate the assessee's profit. The assessee contended that the commission rate should be 1%. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, considering it fair and reasonable to apply an NP rate of 1.2% to cover potential revenue leakages.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the cross appeals of the revenue and the assessee, and the cross objection of the assessee, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on all issues. The order was pronounced on 11.01.2024 at ITAT Amritsar Bench, Amritsar.

---