TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 961
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeals)-XVI, Ahmedabad, dated 13.01.2010 & 15.01.2010 for Assessment Year 2007-08. ITA No. 830/Ahd/2010 & CO No. 106/Ahd/2010 : Assessee- Shri Tikamchand Mutha 2. In this Revenue's appeal, the original grounds raised by the Revenue read as under:- 1. The ld. CIT(A) is erred in law and on facts in restricted addition of Rs. 43,73,860/-made on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account by adopting peak cash deposits (on 60 days basis) and directing that peak investment deposit only should be brought to tax, as unexplained investment. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that there is no presumption in law that peak cash deposits only should be assessed, the onus is on the assessee / persons making....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the AO to adopt peak on 60 days basis for the purpose of addition. 2. The Ld. CIT Appeals has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition on account of cash credit of Rs. 7,55,000/-. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the respondent and considering the legal decisions, the Ld. CIT Appeals ought to have deleted the said addition also and should have accepted the Returned Income. It be so held now. 4. The respondent craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of cross objection on or before of the final hearing of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, deriving income from commission and interest. For the year under consideration, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....posed before us on behalf of the Revenue, inter alia, submitting that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in restricted addition of Rs. 27,02,980/- made on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account by adopting peak cash deposits (on 60 days basis) and directing that peak investment deposit only should be brought to tax, as unexplained investment. The Departmental Representative further submitted that the CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that there was no presumption in law that peak cash deposits only should be assessed, the onus is on the assessee / persons making the claim that such advances given earlier have been received back. In the absence of such claim, the entire cash deposit has to be assessed as unexplained in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....axed in the hands of the assessee and the credit of opening cash balance of Rs. 5,21,000/- should be given to the assessee. In this regard, from the copy of the bank account of Punjab National Bank, CIT(A) found that various cheques had been issued immediately after the cash amount were deposited in this account. For this, the father of the assessee Shri Sureshchand Mutha has stated before the CIT(A) on 11.01.2010 that most of those cheques were issued in favour of UT Motors - a concern of the assessee, giving loan to the needy persons for buying CNG auto kits for 2 to 4 months @ 12% to 15%. In this regard, the CIT(A) observed that even if it was accepted that peak theory would be valid in this case, because the assessee was in the business....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer but only affidavits from such depositors were produced before the First Appellate Authority which was not admitted by him on the ground that the same was not genuine as per the reasons recorded in the appellate order. Therefore, in our opinion, the CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition of Rs. 7,55,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act because no books of accounts are maintained by the assessee and there were no such details on record which can be verifiable. Thus, this ground of cross-objection is also dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as the Cross-objection filed by the Assessee, both are dismissed. ITA No. 831/Ahd/2010 & CO No. 107/Ahd/2010 Shri Sureshchand Mutha 6. Similar....