TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 286
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nds and, therefore, merits to be quashed with directions for appropriate relief to the assessee:- 1) That CIT (A) erred in confirming the order, only by providing partial relief, being passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) of the Act, and failed to appreciate that: a) Scrutiny through CASS, on the basis of "AIR Information" is having a limited scope in view of C.B.D.T guidelines 1 instructions as reported in [2006] 157 Taxman 1(ST) as well as C.B.D.T INSTRUCTION vis-a-vis AIR SCRUTINY [F.No.225/26/2006-ITA.1I (Pt.)], dated the 8th September, 2010; b) Such scrutiny was pretended to be regular scrutiny assessment and hence, the entire informations 1 documentary evidences, being collected, were either ignored or mi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he revised return substitute the original return from the date of filing the original return for the purpose of assessment; f) in not understanding the basic principle of taxation that neither the rule of res judicata nor the rule of estoppel is applicable to an assessment proceeding; Hence, the finding that all credit entries were undisclosed sale & those amounts were income from undisclosed sources u/s. 68 was not based on any evidence or was, for other reasons, perverse, being in total disregard of filing of cash book, bank book, sales book as well as ledgers (being prepared from memorandum record) and hence, such addition must be deleted in toto. 3) That CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer erred in i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5/-. This return of income was revised on 22nd August 2012 wherein income of Rs. 5,52,486/- was shown and included business income of Rs. 3,24,649/- was not covered in the original return of income. The business income was computed by the assessee showing his total sales from the business is Rs. 40,58,112/- @ 8% profit thereon u/s 44AD of the Act amounting to Rs. 3,24,649/-. 4. Based on information received on annual information return, it was found that assessee has deposited Rs. 1,50,05,020/- in cash in his two bank accounts maintained with the ICICI Bank Ltd. during the year. Assessee was asked to file copies of various bank accounts and from those bank accounts it was found that assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 1,49,27,092/- in ICI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... should be deleted. He further submitted that assessee has already shown income u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act where he has already included the sales of Rs. 40,58,112/- and therefore the above deposit of cash is out of sales turnover of the assessee. He further stated that cash deposit out of cash is cash on hand, cash deposit from old customers, advances received etc. cannot be considered as gross receipt. He further submitted that the AO has been given a cash book showing source of cash receipt and payments covering all these banks where State Bank of India, Punjab National Bank, Oriental Bank of Commerce are also described and source of the cash is available in the cash book. He therefore stated that when all transactions of cashbook ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thdrawal from other banks. Therefore such transaction prima facie cannot be unaccounted turnover of the assessee. Undisputedly such transactions cannot be considered for estimating the business income of the assessee. Furthermore assessee has given a reconciliation of the amount of cash deposited of Rs. 1,49,27,029/- in ICICI Bank stating that Rs. 82,54,580/- is cash deposit out of cash withdrawals from various banks. It was further stated that Rs. 5,50,000/- is received in cash from debtor's outstanding. The AO has not verified these claims specifically made before the AO vide letter dated 17.2.2014. Furthermore the Ld. CIT(A) has also not considered this aspect but has merely stating that cash book prepared by the assessee is not reliable....