TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 11
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Appeal before Hon'ble ITAT New Delhi in the case of Sh. Ram Niwas Aggarwal, D-16/381, Sector-07, Rohini, Delhi-110085, vide PAN No.- ABKPA6231C, A.Y. 2008-09. (i). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Ld. CIT(Appeal) erred in not appreciating the facts of the case properly? (ii). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Ld. CIT (Appeal) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 13,30,16,654/- on account of unexplained total deposits with the bank. (iii) The CIT(A) erred in admitting additional evidences without giving sufficient opportunity to the Assessing Officer under Rule 46-A of the I.T. Act, 1961." ITA No. 5393/Del/2016 "Grounds of Appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of commission of 25 paise per thousand, the assessee paid 10 paise to Shri Dharmender Kumar. The Assessing Officer treated the entire deposits in these bank accounts totaling Rs. 3,34,35,821/- as unexplained credits. The Assessing Officer also treated the entire credits in the assessee's bank account with Syndicate Bank as unexplained and after considering the amounts transferred to this account from M/s Sidh Trading Company and M/s. Pride Trade Agency and added the sum of Rs. 13,30,16,654/- to the income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also added the commission income of Rs. 5,016/- on account of the transaction of M/s. Sidh Trading Company and M/s. Pride Trade Agency and Rs. 24,896/- on account of transactions in the Syndicate Bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the earlier year, the Assessing Officer has rightly made addition of Rs. 24,896/- to the income of the assessee on commission. 7. The Ld. AR relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 the same Assessing Officer has accepted the assessee's plea in respect of commission income. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of PCIT vs. Vijay Conductors India Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No.683/2015 dated 29.09.2015) has deleted the similar addition on cash credits. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in case of M/s Alpha Chemie Trade Agencies Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 6558 to 6564/Mum/2012 order dated 09.09.2016) wherein on the similar facts the income by way of comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at 0.37% of the net credits (i.e. total transactions of these two concerns less transfer to M/s R.N. Aggarwal & Co.). 8.1 There is evidently no doubt that the Department and the appellant are now in agreement that the appellant is the beneficial owner of M/s Pride Trade Agency and M/s Sidh Trading Co., and that he was earning commission of 0.37-0.43% on the deposits in those bank accounts. Considering the Department's own stand in subsequent scrutiny assessments, and the findings of the CIT(A)-32 in the case of Shri Dharmender Kumar in the A.Y. 2010-11, there is no credible basis for treating the entire turnover as the income of the appellant. The credits in the Syndicate Bank account of the appellant are shown to be out of the busin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of M/s Pride Trade Agency and M/s Sidh Trading Co.. The appellant had submitted that the cash withdrawn of Rs. 10,33,000/- from the bank account of M/s Sidh Trading Co. and of Rs. 5,70,400/- from the bank account of M/s Pride Trade Agency should be reduced from the total transactions, as allowed in the order of the CIT(A)32 in the case of Shri Dharmender Kumar in the AY 2010-11. However, the appellant has been unable to show the nexus between the cash withdrawn and cash deposited on later dates. Hence, this claim is not accepted. The commission income works out to Rs. 1,23,712/- accordingly. 9. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed." From the perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it can be seen that the protective addition in the....