2016 (10) TMI 252

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ins to the assessment year 2008-09. According to the appellant, the present appeal raises the following substantial questions of law: - "1. Whether under the facts & circumstances of the case, the 'presumptive charge' of income u/s 44AF is distinguishable from arriving at 'chargeable income' u/s 29 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the decision of the Tribunal is against the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Court in the case of CIT vs. Surinder Pal Anand (2010) 48 DTR 135 (P&H) and hence violative of judicial discipline?" The relevant facts which need to be noticed for adjudicating upon the present appeal are that the assessee is in the business of retai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt year as borne out from the record are as under: - "____________________________________________________________ Value Date Post Date Details Chq Debit No. Credit Balance       BROUGHT FORWARD   0.00 16.06.07 16.06.07 DMINTA 000           DJ       30.06.07 30.06.07 BY INTT   1,817.00 1,05,618.00 Cr 13.08.07 13.08.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 1,55,118.00 Cr 14.08.07 14.08.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 2,04,618.00 Cr 16.08.07 16.08.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 2,54,118.00 Cr 17.08.07 17.08.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....   49,500.00 12,93,618.00 Cr 06.11.07 06.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 13,43,118.00 Cr 07.11.07 07.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 13,92,618.00 Cr 08.11.07 08.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 14,42,118.00 Cr 10.11.07 10.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 14,91,618.00 Cr 16.11.07 16.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 15,41,118.00 Cr 26.11.07 26.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 15,90,618.00 Cr 28.11.07 28.11.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 16,40,118.00 Cr 01.12.07 01.12.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 16,89,618.00 Cr 03.12.07 03.12.07 BY CASH   49,500.00 17,39,118.00 Cr 04.12.07 04....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er did not show any withdrawals made by the assessee till February, 2008. The assessee failed to tell the names of the parties from whom he purchased the material/furniture for sale. Accordingly, invoking the provisions of Section 69A of the Act, cash amounting to Rs. 18,31,500/- deposited by the assessee, in his bank account, was ordered to be added to his income. The assessee challenged the re-assessment order by filing an appeal before the Commissioner, Income Tax (Appeals), Patiala (for short the 'Commissioner'), who rejected the plea of the assessee with regard to the challenge to the very initiation of the re-assessment proceedings. The assessee had raised a ground that the assessing officer had not recorded any reasons but....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2,00,000/-. The assessee was also found to have failed to prove any purchases made by him from his withdrawals especially when these withdrawals were made only in February, 2008 i.e. at the fag end of the financial year. The Tribunal further noted that in his return, the assessee had shown sales of Rs. 18,82,800/- with net profit of Rs. 1,08,000/- and with this low profit margin, without making purchases no sale could have possibly been effected by the assessee. Thus, the cash deposited by the assessee in his bank account was not believed to be from sales effected by him. The assessee's plea that he usually purchased furniture on credit basis was also considered and rejected as no evidence of making any purchases on credit had been f....