TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 435
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and the evidences placed on record. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in facts of the case in presuming that the appellant requested to assess all credits as sales and gross profit be assessed as income of the appellant despite the fact that after explaining the source of cash deposits it was claimed that the addition of gross amount is in violation of theory of taxation of real income. 3. That the addition of Rs. 22,16,710 made under Section 69A of the Act to the income of the assessee is not tenable under the law because additions are made in gross ignorance and in violation of Real Income Theory of taxation which states that no income could be earned without incurring expenses for the same. 4. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of such cash deposit of Rs. 32,59,950/-, the assessee furnished the cash book of M/s Om Sai Ram Garments in which the assessee is a proprietor without any supporting bills/vouchers. Since the assessee did not furnish the supporting bills and vouchers, the AO held that the genuineness of purchase and sales cannot be substantiated and this is bogus sale and purchase. He noted that the assessee has declared gross turnover or gross receipt amounting to Rs. 13,50,125/- and has offered Rs. 2,82,000/- for taxation. Since the assessee's total deposit of Rs. 35,66,835/- was for the period from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015 and the assessee has declared gross receipt of Rs. 13,50,125/-, therefore, the AO, invoking the provisions of section 69A, made an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee has shown gross profit fate of 20.89% and, therefore, the same rate of profit should be applied to the total deposits in the bank account which are the sale proceeds. In his alternate contention, the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a chart containing the details of deposits and withdrawals and submitted that the peak credit comes to only Rs. 7,70,390/-. Therefore, he has no objection if the same amount is brought to tax as against Rs. 22,16,710 made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A). 7. The ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly objected to the arguments advanced by the assessee and supported the order of the AO and the CIT(A). He submitted that neither during the course of assessment proceedings nor during the appellate p....