TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 785
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order dated 02.09.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the assessment year (AY) 2010-11 in ITA No. 196/Del/2019 whereby the ITAT has sustained the additions made by the CIT (A). 2. The present case originates with the Assessing Officer (AO) receiving information for non-filing of ITR for AY 2010-11 through NMS Cycle. On perusal of ITS data, it came to the notice of the AO that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 15,86,000/- in his bank account with Khatri Co-OP (U) Bank Ltd., during the period of 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. The case was reopened under Section 147 of the Act and notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2017 was issued. Thereafter, notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act dated 11.10.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ear but when the notice under Section 148 of the Act was received, he filed the same, declaring his income as Rs. 1,26,999/-. The CIT(A) held that the averments made by the appellant were not substantiated and it was a case where cash had been deposited merely to generate funds in the bank account, whenever payments were required to be made by cheque. No evidence of Kirana business had been presented and no books of account had been produced. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO was confirmed. 4. The findings of the CIT (A) read as under; "Findings/Determination 4. The appellant's grievance arises from assessment order u/s 1471144 of the Income Tax Act, dated 22.12.2017, whereby income of the appella....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lize the assessment proceedings exparte u/s 144 of the IT Act 1961 on the basis of the materials available on record. As the assessee has failed to comply with the notices, u/s 148/142(1) and show cause and the cash deposited of Rs. 15.86,000/- of the assessee remain unexplained, Since the assessee has failed to provide any information/details, therefore, the assessment is completed on the basis of best judgment assessment as per material available on record. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is justified to assess the income of the assessee by making addition of Rs. 15,86,000/- on account of explained cash deposits in bank account u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1951. I am satisfied that the assessee has failed to furnish ret....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or any Building etc in concerned previous year. It is also informed that assess doing business of general store (kiryana items trading) at 49F, Subhash Chowk, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi and nor having any other income other than interest. Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss account was not prepared because not required to prepare And Bank statement is enclosed. It is clarified that assessee is running a kiryana store so cash was deposit of sales mode. It is also clarified that assessee not having taxable income so that assessee not filed his ITR for A. Y. 201011. So please look at the matter and please close our case because there is no tax evasion on our behalf. Thanking Your Yours' Turely For Agrawal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Now Sir I am again submitting the said papers of the assessee that was submit to A. O. 1. Bank Statement 2. Copy of ITR and computation of total income 3. Copy of submission made to A. O. Thanking You Yours Faithfully For Ravinder Kumar PAN: BKLPK2219M A.R. 8. I have examined the facts at hand. I have perused the appellant's explanation. The appellant claims that it was the proceeds of Kirana Shops sale that were deposited in the bank account. In this connection, I find that the averments of the appellant are-not substantiated. This is a case where cash has been deposited merely to generate funds in the bank account, whenever pay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....were sale receipts, the tax authorities cannot be faulted for making the addition of the unexplained cash entries in the bank account. Firstly, the appellant chose to abstain from joining the assessment proceedings despite several notices. Then, he did not render any cogent explanation or documentary evidence to support his contentions before the CIT (A) or ITAT. Pertinently, the assessee had not filed his income tax return for AY 2010-11 and justified his action by contending that he was not liable to file the same as he had adopted presumptive taxation scheme under Section 44AD of the Act and had availed the benefit thereof, wherein there was no obligation to explain individual entry of cash deposit in his bank account unless such entry h....