TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1270
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rm No.36 at Column No.10. However, the notice issued by the Registry through RPAD was returned by the Postal Authorities with the remarks "Not Known". The assessee has also not taken any steps to intimate the change of address, if any. Under these circumstances, we have no other option, but, to decide the appeal on the basis of the material available on record and after hearing the Ld. D.R. 3. Facts of the case, in brief are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 25.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 2,00,150/-, after claiming deduction of Rs. 79,500/- under Chapter-VIA of the I.T. Act, 1961. The return was processed under section 143(1) and thereafter was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Statutory notic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....total income of the assessee as per the provisions of Section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Thus, the A.O. completed the assessment on a total income of Rs. 70,56,545/-. 4.1. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the various additions made by the A.O. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect and unjustified in a) Dismissing the appeal of the assessee. b) Not holding the assessment illegal and invalid in the absence of any valid service of notice u/s 143(2) for selecting the case for scrutiny i.e before the expiry of the time limit permissible for taking the case u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....isite condition for any addition u/s 68. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect and unjustified in confirming the assessment incorrectly made by the AO u/s 144." 6. We have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the record. 7. It is an admitted fact that due to nonappearance of the assessee before the A.O. and non-filing of the details, the A.O. made various additions to the total income of the assessee. We find the Ld. CIT(A) in his elaborate order has sustained the various additions made by the A.O. So far as the disallowance of 20% of the expenses is concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) while upholding the addition made by the A.O. has observed as under : "In ground no.1, the appellant has chall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onfirmations did not contain the PAN of the party and were undated. Even the Ledger account of these parties filed by the assessee only shows that the assessee had been making only cash payment to these parties against purchases of Rs. 20,000/- each on continuous dates. Hardly any payment has been made through cheques. It is apparent that the assessee is making purchases from small parties who do not have the capacity to sell their goods on credit. The cash payments have been shown to square up the account on subsequent dates. Thus, the grounds of appeal are dismissed." 7.2. Similarly, while upholding the addition of unexplained cash deposit in the Bank A/c under section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical find....