TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 1190
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome from Astrology & Vastu Shastra ignoring the fact that the assessee did not maintain client register for calculation of total receipt. 2. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in restricting the addition to Rs. 4,58,100/- as against Rs. 39,26,195/- made as income from other sources ignoring the fact that the assessee could not substantiate the income as agricultural income during the course of assessment proceedings. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Lucknow has erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs. 12,66,200/- made on account of unexplained cash deposit in bank account ignoring the fact that the assessee did not produce any substantial evidence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rge heavy fees for providing consultation. Thus, receipt from client is not verifiable. Looking to this fact books of accounts of the assessee for astrology business is rejected u/s 145(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 and an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- is hereby made in total receipt astrology/vastu shastra which will give a equal addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- in net profit. Thus, there will be an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- in net profit. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and written submission before him which has been reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) in his order, therefore, need not to be repeated herein again. The ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....before us any contrary facts to deviate from the findings recorded the ld. CIT(A), we find no infirmity with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is confirmed. Accordingly ground No.1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 6. Next ground relates to the restriction of addition of Rs. 4,58,100/- by the ld. CIT(A) as against Rs. 39,26,195/- made by the Assessing Officer as income from other sources ignoring the fact that assessee could not substantiate the income as agricultural income. 7. The ld. CIT(A) in his order has observed that there are two facets involved in the addition made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee shown agricultural income of Rs. 10,16,480/- in the capital acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cussions, the ld. CIT(A) held that agricultural income credited in the capital account as Rs. 10,16,480/- is the correct figure and the mistake in not filing the return of income of Rs. 42,25,400/- was wrongly shown in the relevant column and it is not correct figure. The Assessing Officer, therefore, was directed to take the agricultural income of the assessee at Rs. 10,16,480/-. 8. Next issue involved in this appeal relates to the genuineness of the agricultural income shown. 9. The ld. CIT(A) observed that identical issue had come up for consideration in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 wherein addition of Rs. 4,58,100/- was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Respectfully following the findings recorded in the said ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as under:- "As per AIR information, assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 10 lacs or more in a saving bank account amounting to Rs. 12,66,200/- on 31.03.2012 from State Bank of India, Shop No. 12, Qutab Plaza, Shop Cent, DLF Qutab Enclave, Gurgaon (Haryana). The assessee was asked vide order sheet entry dated 22.07.2014 to explain source of this deposit. In this regard the assessee in his reply dated 29.10.2014 submitted that there is no such single transaction of Rs. 1266200/- on 31.03.2012 in SBI Bank a/c 20000241312. The assessee has not given source of cash Rs. 1266200/-which was deposited in bank. Thus, this amount remained on explained and treated as income from undisclosed source u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and added to tota....