2021 (12) TMI 920

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he A.O, therefore, completed the assessment under section 144/147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 by estimating the profit rate of 0.5% on the commodity transaction of Rs. 19,48,71,150/- and made addition of Rs. 9,74,355/- to the total income of the assessee. In otherwords, the A.O. determined the total income at Rs. 9,74,355/-. 2.1. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee apart from challenging the addition on merit, challenged the validity of the assessment in the absence of service of any notice to the assessee. However, the Ld. CIT(A) was also not satisfied with the arguments advanced by the assessee and upheld the action of the A.O. by observing as under : 3. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not treating reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the I T Act, as invalid, bad in law, unjust and contrary to the facts and law. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has made the addition of Rs. 5,00,075/- on the other ground then the reason stated u/s 147 / 148 of the I T Ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee is a non filer of tax return and the Ld. CIT(A) has already given substantial relief to the assessee and, therefore, the assessee should not have any grievance. 6. I have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that the A.O. reopened the assessment on the ground that the assessee has made transactions in commodities exchange of Rs. 19,48,71,150/- during the impugned assessment year and had not filed its return of income. Since the assessee neither responded to the notice issued under section 148 nor responded to the notice issued under section 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, therefore, the A.O. estimated the profit @ 0.5% of Rs. 19,48,71,150/- and added an amount of Rs. 9,74,355/- to the total income of the assessee under section 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961 as undisclosed cash deposit in the Bank account. I find the Ld. CIT(A) found that there is no such cash deposit, for which, he deleted the same. However, since the assessee could not explain the details of margin money of Rs. 5,00,075/-, he sustained the same, the reasons of w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....C-121, New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur, Delhi whereas the Assessee has not been carrying out any activity at this address as the property was sold. The Assessing Officer has nowhere mentioned the date of service of the notice or the return of the registered post. It has been argued that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is bad in law without the service of the notice. It is further stated that the Assessing Officer did not allow to inspect the file. Hence, he did not follow the procedure for the initiation of reassessment proceedings. The Ashtalis दिल्ली Page 8 of 11 Certified ef Document 2 आयकर विभाग Ashok Kumar & Family A.Y. 2011-12 Appeal No. 391/18-19 notice of demand was sent on correct address. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was aware of the correct address of the Assessee. 7.3 I have considered the arguments of the Appellant with regard to the service of the notice. The Appellant has nowhere stated as to which address was given on the PAN database. Whether the Assessee applied for PAN from the old address? Whether the Assessee applie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... balance appearing opposite this entry. Balance appearing prior to this entry was Rs.1,39,445/- and after the credit entry of Rs.50,000/-, the balance became Rs.1,89,445/-. The Appellant has submitted the summary of the transactions through Hitech BPO Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (broker) which shows the sales of Rs. 14,36,88,953.18 and the purchases of Rs.14,37,01,444.31 with net value of Rs.(-)12,491.13. It is submitted that the margin money of Rs.5,00,075/- was paid from the bank as under: Date of payment 27.10.2010 Amount Rs. 50,000/- 27.10.2010 04.11.2010 06.01.2011 27.01.2011 Total Rs. 75/- Rs. 80,000/- Rs.1,70,000/- Rs.2,00,000/- Rs.5,00,075/- 7.7 It is submitted that the transactions are finalized mostly on the telephone only. 7.8 I have considered the facts of the case and the submission of the Appellant. I have already held that the service of the notice u/s 148 or subsequent notices issued by the Assessing Officer cannot be questioned by the Assessee because it is not his case that the Assessing Officer issued the notice to an address which was not on the PAN database or the Assessing Officer f....