2017 (10) TMI 540

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....claring total income of Rs. 1,45,350. The case was selected on account of AIR information received against the assessee. The A.O. issued various statutory notices. However, despite service of notice, none attended the proceedings before the A.O. Some proceedings were attended, but it was adjourned on the request of the assessee. The A.O. issued notice for completing the best judgment assessment under section 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee was required to explain source of the cash deposited amounting to Rs. 66,78,128 as per AIR information in S.B. Account maintained with ICICI Bank Ltd., Preet Vihar, New Delhi during assessment year under appeal along with documentary evidences. The notice was also served by affixture. However, non....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....refore, during the appellate hearing on 22.11.2013, the appellant's AR was asked as to why the peak credit in his bank account should not be treated as income from undisclosed sources u/s 68 of the I. T Act. In the written submissions filed on 29.11.2013, the appellant's AR had requested that the peak negative cash balance as on 02.07.2008 of Rs. 1,56,225/- based on the date wise cash flow statement now submitted should be treated as appellant's income from undisclosed sources u/s 68 of the I T Act instead of Rs. 66,78,128/- added by the A.O. The appellant admits that he maintains no books of account and therefore cash flow statement now submitted is a cooked up document and therefore can be considered only as an afterthought. The fact that....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hould have been confronted to the A.O. Therefore, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without giving an opportunity to the A.O. is bad in law and matter may be remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. D.R. submitted that the theory of peak is not applicable to the facts of the case. 4. We have considered the submissions of the Ld. D.R. and are in agreement with the contention of the Ld. D.R. that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). It is an admitted fact that assessee did not attend at many assessment proceedings despite service of notices. However, some proceedings were attended, but adjournment was sought. No explanation was filed with any documentary evidence to explain the cash deposited by asses....