TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 214
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uantum appeals. ITA No.6239/M/2014 (AY 2002-03) 3. This appeal filed by the assessee on 5.10.2014 is against the said order of the CIT (A)-37, Mumbai dated 31.7.2014 and the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal read as under: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO as well as CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the peak working as submitted by the appellant, without giving any reasons for the same. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO as well as CIT (A) has erred in working out peak balance by not giving credit of income offered by the assessee in the return of income emerging out of the same bank statements. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld AO as well as CIT (A) has erred in working out peak balance by not giving credit of Khotari group bank transactions on which Assessing Officer has separately considered commission income, as returned by the appellant." 4. Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of bill discounting, commission & income from other sources. A search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... purpose, AO reduced the closing balance at the end of the relevant previous year to arrive at the net peak balance for the assessment year. Before the CIT (A), assessee contended that the method followed by the AO is not correct. According to the assessee, the correct working would be to compute the peak credit for each subsequent assessment year and to reduce from this, the peak credit computed as taxable in the earlier assessment year. In that event, the peak credit computed in the earlier year was more than peak amount computed in the subsequent assessment year, and no addition on account of peak credit was to be made for that assessment year. In other words, it was the contention of the assessee that only incremental peak can be considered as taxable unexplained investment for that subsequent year. In this regard, after considering the submissions of the assessee, CIT (A) observed that in the earlier round, the AO has considered each bank account independently despite the directions of the ITAT to consider all the bank accounts together and only the cumulative position of the transactions in these bank accounts should be considered. It is the opinion of the CIT (A) that once t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edings and also the relevant material placed before us. On perusal of the said decision of the Tribunal (supra) in the first round, we find the Tribunal‟s directions are only on the peak credits and there is no reference to the normal steams of income. It is obvious that no separate direction is uncalled for as the normal steams of income has to be taxed separately. Further, in our opinion, the income receipts credited to P & L Account or bank account earned out of business are outside the exercise of peak credit analysis and they are separately taxed ie in addition to the peak credits in any year. The income credited to the books of account of the assessee or the bank should be considered exclusive of the peak credit of additions in the assessment. Therefore, we approve the views of the CIT (A). Considering the same, the decision of the CIT (A) vide paras 5 to 5.8 of his order is an order. Thus, the order of the CIT (A) on these issues is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. ITA No.6240/M/2014 (AY 2003-04) ITA No.6241/M/2014 (AY 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Act without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld CIT (A) has erred in confirming penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act on the returned income, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case." 13. In these appeals, assessee raised the issue of levy of penalty in respect of the commission income shown in the return of income filed in response to notice u/s 153A on the ground that no returns of income have been filed as per the provisions of section 139 of the Act for the respective assessment years. Similarly, penalty proceedings were also initiated in respect of unexplained deposits in bank accounts as well as unexplained investments made by the assessee. While disposing of the quantum appeal, we have already discussed the facts of this case and they include during the assessment proceedings, AO did not accept the assessee‟s plea that only the peak credit should be treated as his income and not the entire amount found deposited in the bank account. On appeal, CIT (A) confirmed the AO‟s decision in respect of quantum appeals. On further appeal, ITAT vide its ord....