TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 814
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is Rs. 13,67,750, school fee for children Rs. 40,000 and house hold expenses for the year Rs. 1,20,000 and LIC paid by assessee Rs. 77,373, thus the total drawings comes to Rs. 16,05,123. The assessee also furnished copy of the capital account and P & L A/c wherein gross receipts was revised to Rs. 25,01,020 against gross receipts of Rs. 9,25,570 declared in the return. The A.O. after considering the reply of the assessee noted that assessee filed return of income of Rs. 1,09,610 against gross receipt of Rs. 9,25,570 and assessee did not maintain books of account. Therefore, assessee's revised claim has no basis to make such declaration as no documents in support of the same has been furnished during the assessment proceedings. The A.O. also noted that assessee filed revised statement of receipts because he was not able to justify the source of the cash deposits in the bank account. Revise statement cannot be considered as revised return under law. The A.O. after going through the bank statement, unexplained cash deposit, examined the issue in detail and noted the details of withdrawal and deposit in the bank account in the assessment year in appeal and came to the finding that so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e to be given by cheque, he gave the amount of Rs. 8 lakhs to the assessee being his father which were deposited in cash as Rs. 5,50,000 and Rs. 2,50,000 on 11.04.2007 in the joint bank account of assessee and his son. Apart from this, assessee had also received Rs. 40,000 by cheque towards his business receipts which cheque was initially dishonored and again cleared. It was, therefore, submitted that assessee has sufficient funds and net profit from the sale of building material would show aggregate income for the year at Rs. 3,60,480. Therefore, this addition should be reduced. 5. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept the contention of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of assessee. His findings in paras 4.1 to 5 of the impugned order are reproduced as under : "Findings : 4.1. I have carefully considered the assessment order passed by the A.O, original appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in appeal No. 124/10- 11 and the appellate order of the Hon'ble ITAT restoring back the matter for fresh adjudication to the file of CIT(A). During the restored back proceedings, Ld. AR has provided copy of bank a/cs maintained with Andhra Bank, the Bank of Rajastha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ced claim is being made in respect of business receipts, but there is no change in the profit ratio. 4.1.3. From the factual matrix of the case, as discussed above, it is noticed that apparently there is no change in the facts of the case, which were before the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) during the original assessment/appellate proceedings. Even during the restored back proceedings, no plausible reasons have been provided by the Ld. AR to explain the increase in the business receipts disclosed before the AO from Rs. 9,25,570/- to Rs. 25,01,620/-, maintaining the same profit even on the enhanced business receipts. However, now during the restored back proceedings, the claim of business receipts has further been revised to Rs. 30,04,000/- without providing any supporting documentary evidence, apart from copy of bank statements. The onus is on the assessee to disclose full and true particulars of income. Assessee does not get any immunity of an assertion that he is an simple layman. In otherwords, ignorance of law is not an excuse. 4.1.4. Further, I am in agreement with the comments of the AO while passing the assessment order that if there was any bonafide mistake in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alls short of the total deposit made. Thus in the entirety of facts and circumstances as discussed above, the submissions and explanations furnished are found to be devoid of any merit and just an after- thought to cover up the entire transactions for which assessee has no plausible explanation. 4.1.7. Thus, I am of the considered view that amount of Rs. 8 lakh found to be deposited in Andhra Bank remained unexplained apart from the addition of Rs. 3,59,900/- made by the AO. Therefore, the same is also being treated as unexplained cash deposit and accordingly, AO is directed to issue fresh notice of demand incorporating the above amount of Rs. 8 lakh. Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1 )(c) have been initiated separately for the above additions as appellant has concealed the true particulars of his income and provisions of Explanation (1) to above section found to be clearly applicable in this case. 5. In the result, appeal is dismissed." 6. I have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties. Learned Counsel for the Assessee on ground Nos. 1 and 2 submitted that assessee is a semi-literate and layman and has suffered because earlier lawyer did not put-up ....