2018 (4) TMI 1567

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for condonation along with an affidavit. Considering the petition for condonation of delay, being satisfied with the sufficient cause for the delay, we hereby condone the delay in filing the appeal and the same is admitted to be heard on merits. 3. Briefly stated, assessee is an individual, deriving income from contract works. He filed return of income for the AY. 2011-12, declaring total income of Rs. 5,03,520/-. In the scrutiny assessment proceedings, AO noticed that there were deposits to the tune of Rs. 53,85,860/- in ICICI Bank during the year. As assessee has not furnished any information in response to various notices, and as there is failure on the part of assessee in complying with the notices, assessment has been completed u/s. 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is deleted. 6. Further, though the raised ground regarding disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000 claimed as deduction under chapter VI, as no evidences are filed in respect of the claim, the action of Assessing Officer is confirmed". Assessee is aggrieved. 4. Ld. Counsel submitted that there is no dispute with reference to the amounts taken by the Ld.CIT(A) in the order. It was submitted that the total credits both by way of cash and cheque are to the tune of Rs. 94,88,645/- and assessee has admitted the turnover at Rs. 59,65,817/-. The balance amount of Rs. 35,22,828/- [slight variation from the order of CIT(A)] is also to be considered as turnover of assessee, as these amounts are all part of the business receipts. 4.1. It was submitted ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....igh Court in the case of CIT Vs. President Industries [258 ITR 654] (Gujarat- HC) has held that it cannot be matter of an argument that the amount of sales by itself cannot represent the income of assessee, who has not disclosed the sales. It is the realization of excess over the cost incurred that only forms part of the profit included in the consideration of sales. Similar view was taken in the case of CIT Vs. Gurubachhan Singh J. Juneja [215 CTR 509] (Gujarat-High Court) and CIT Vs. Sharda Real Estate (P.) Ltd., [99 DTR 100] (MP-HC). In the case of Jyotichand Bhaichand Saraf & Sons (P.) Ltd., Vs. DCIT [139 ITD 10] the Co-ordinate Bench at Pune has confirmed that the addition could only be made only to an extent of gross profit earned on ....