TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 474
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....40/-. 3. During the assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the of the Income Tax Act [Act], the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee is maintaining a Savings Bank A/c with Axis Bank, Nallakunta Branch, Hyderabad vide A/c No.913010029036358. On perusal of the bank account statement, the AO observed that the assessee has made cash deposits to the tune of Rs. 64,14,695/-. He also noticed that on several occasions, cash has been deposited from outstation. The assessee was therefore asked to furnish the details of the sources of funds for the cash deposits, the nature of transactions made in the SB A/c and the transaction-wise analysis of cash/cheque deposits, reflected in the bank account. 3.1. In reply, the assessee submitted th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....law and in both. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,14,186/- as unexplained peak cash credits in savings bank account without proper Appreciation of the facts. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax failed to appreciate the fact that the peak cash credits in savings bank account is the turnover of the appellant, only net profit is to be added not the entire peak credit. 4. The appellant craves leave to add or amend or alter any of the grounds at the time of hearing of appeal". 5. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee, Shri K.A.Sai Prasad, submitted that though the assessee had taken the contention of hand loans from friends etc., before the AO but could not substantiate hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... This view was also followed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Devi Prasad Vishwanath (supra). However, I find that in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif Vs. CIT (supra), the assessee therein had raised the contentions of business income only before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was in those circumstances that the Hon'ble Apex Court held that as it was a question of fact, it could not have been raised for the first time before the Hon'ble High Court or Hon'ble Supreme Court. But, in the case before the Tribunal, the assessee has raised this ground before the CIT(A) itself, and the CIT(A) held that the claim of the assessee that the entire cash deposits represents business transaction, is not estab....