TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 872
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd is dismissed as not pressed. 3. Ground No.1.4 is general in nature, which do not require specific adjudication. 4. Ground No.1.1 is related to the cash deposits in bank account amounting to Rs. 10.00 lakhs. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2010-11, the A.O. found that the assessee had undisclosed bank account in Indian Bank, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam with account No.713957051 and made cash deposits in the bank account to the tune of Rs. 10.00 lakhs for which the assessee explained the source as advances received for sale of land. The assessee stated that a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs was received from Sri K. Venkata Ganesh and K. Gouri Devi as per the agreement dated 21.1.2010 and further sum of Rs. 5 lakhs from S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the CIT(A) order which reads as under: "5.3 I have considered the submissions and details flied. It is pertinent to note that the assessee was asked to explain the source for the cash deposit to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs noted in his bank account, which was not disclosed to the Department. The assessee had raised a plea that it represented advance from sale of property. But the inquiry made by the AO clearly reveal that such a claim was not genuine. It is also relevant to note that the alleged parties who have purportedly made the impugned advances were related parties, and they did not have creditworthiness to make the advance. The lack of financial capacity of these parties clearly give an indication that the alleged sale agreem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rties who have purportedly made the impugned advances were related parties and they did not have the creditworthiness to make the advances. The lack of financial capacity of the parties clearly shows an indication that the sale agreements were only make believe arrangements. Since the assessee failed to furnish the evidence to establish the genuineness of the advance, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. Ground No.1.1 of the assessee's appeal on this issue is dismissed. 6. Ground No.1.2 is related to the cash deposit of Rs. 19,30,950/- by cheque. The assessee has made cheque deposits of Rs. 19,30,930/- in the Indian Bank of Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam which is not disclosed to the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts. Therefore, the AO is justified in assessing the amount of Rs. 19,30,930/- as unexplained income of the assessee. The plea reiterated during the appeal proceedings that they were business receipts was not substantiated and hence rejected." 7. During the appeal hearing before us, the Ld. A.R. stated that these deposits were the business receipts but no evidence was furnished with regard to the source of deposits as well as expenditure incurred in connection with the earning of this money.Therefore it is established that the cheque deposits were from unexplained sources and the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. In the result, the appeal of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... consider that the estimate of the business receipts at 5% is fair and reasonable and the same is upheld." 9. From the order of the CIT(A), it is established that the assessee had agreed for estimation of income @ 5% before the A.O. Both the A.O. and Ld. CIT(A) have estimated the income @ 5% after careful consideration of the net profit of earlier years and considering the fact that the assessee failed to produce the books of accounts. The A.O. has rejected the books of accounts and estimated the income. The Ld. A.R. did not make out a case for estimation of income @ 4% with relevant evidences except arguing that earlier percentage of income required to be adopted. We are unable to consider the request of the assessee to reduce the estim....