TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1546
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved in respect of agreement to sale of ancestral land at village mauje Vakhari Tal. Deola Dist. Nashik. The CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that there is also cash withdrawal of Rs. 40,50,000/- in the said bank accounts and the closing balance is not much. 3) On the facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in considering the cash deposits at Rs. 53.63,000/- as against Rs. 53,43,000/- due to calculation mistake. 4) On the facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in making addition of Rs. 25,200/- on account of deemed value of the flat which has been used mainly for the purpose of business. 5) On the facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in making enhancement of income by Rs. 64,36,209/- in respect of alleged unexplained deposits in Bank of Baroda, which were already assessed by the A.O. u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act and the above fact was pointed out to the CIT(A) in written submission filed. 6) On the facts and in law the CIT(A) and A.O. have erred in considering the total deposits in bank as income of the appellant without considering the fact that cheques deposited were dishonored. 7) On the facts and in law the CIT(A) has erred in not accepting the fact that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessing Officer Shri Girish Popat Musale admitted that he has paid cash of Rs. 59 Lacs to the assessee sourced out of his agricultural income and pensionery benefit of his father. However, no evidences were produced before the Assessing Officer to substantiate its statement. Shri Girish Popat Musale is neither assessed to tax nor files his return of income. The Assessing Officer in the remand proceedings came to the conclusion that after going through the Sathe khat, Gat No.1362, 274, 278 & 339 are the same Gat Nos. which was yet to be purchased by Shri Girish Popat Musale and therefore, the sources stated by Shri Girish Popat Musale are ambiguous. 5. The assessee filed rejoinder regarding remand report of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) observed that the entire transaction is carried out in cash. He further observed that in the instant case no document has been placed in respect of sale of agricultural produce. No documentary evidence has been produced during the course of any proceeding before the Assessing Officer or before him to explain the availability of cash with Shri Girish Popat Musale and belongs to assessee's extended family. There was no direct evidence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....010-11 in assessee's own case wherein on the same issue, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has applied GP rate @15% with regard to the additional income in the hands of the assessee. The Ld. AR of the assessee prayed that this decision may be followed in the interest of justice. 9. We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We find that on the similar issue, the Pune Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case has observed and held as under: "9. On perusal of the record and after hearing rival contentions, the issue which is raised for adjudication is on account of credits in the bank accounts maintained by the assessee, but undisclosed in the return of income. The assessee explained the nature of credits and debits of the said bank accounts and claimed that the same related to his business of sale and purchase of hardware items. Undisputedly, the said bank account with Bank of Baroda was undisclosed bank account and the said receipts need to be included in the total receipts declared for the year under consideration. The assessee in response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, had declared gross profit on the said receipts and had filed additiona....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt and the additions upheld by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) are also same. That for the same grievance, no two appeals can be preferred before this August Forum. That since we have already decided the issue in ITA No.2226/PUN/2016, therefore, on the same additions in ITA No.1520/PUN/2016 becomes infructuous and hence, is dismissed. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.1520/PUN/2016 is dismissed. ITA No.1521/PUN/2016 ITA No.153/PUN/2017 A.Ys. 2012-13 & 2013-14 14. At the very outset, in ITA No.153/PUN/2017, we observe that there is a delay of 20 days. The assessee has filed affidavit along with petition regarding condonation of delay. We have perused the documents and are convinced with the reasons submitted before us. The Ld. DR has also conceded to condonation of the delay. We, therefore, in view of the relevant documents placed before us and the justified reasons therein and the submissions of the parties condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 15. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed an ex-parte order. With respect to the additions, though written submissions were filed, it was only statement on facts that w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he order imposing penalty was to be made only on the ground on which the penalty proceedings were initiated and it could not be a fresh ground of which the assessee had no notice. 20. We have perused the case records and considered the judicial pronouncement placed before us. The facts reveal that initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act as well as penalty order, the charge for which penalty u/s.271(1) (c) of the Act has been levied, is not specific. It appears that while initiating penalty proceedings, the Assessing Officer mentioned one limb i.e. concealment of income but at the time of levying penalty, he mentioned both the limbs i.e. 'concealment of income' and 'furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income'. It is apparent that there is ambiguity in the mind of Assessing Officer as to which limb/charge, penalty is to be levied. That taking guidance from the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Samson Perinchery (supra.) wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has considered the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manjunath Cotton and Ginning Factory (supra.), the legal proposition that come....