TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 729
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unts as income from unexplained source u/s 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and CIT (A)-32 was not justified to uphold the order of Income Tax Officer on this Issue. 2. That out of Rs. 13,00,000/- cash deposited into Bank account Rs. 10,25,000/- was received from farmers for development of land and Rs. 2,75,000/- was out of cash in hand available with appellant as per its books of account. 3. That Land could not be developed due to unavoidable circumstances and Rs. 10,25,000/- were paid in cash to the farmers during the year. 4. That Ld. A.O. and CIT (A) was not justified for not accepting the loss of Rs. 43,525/- from business which the appellant had set off against the income from other sources of Rs. 38,599/-. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on behalf of the assessee. The notice sent through speed post is returned with remark by the Postal Authority "left". Under these facts and circumstances of the case and as the assessee has not provided any other address, the appeal is taken up for hearing and being disposed off in the absence of the assessee. 3. Ground Nos.1 to 3 are inter-connected and are being disposed off together for the sake of brevity. These grounds are raised against making the addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee company. 4. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the Assessing Officer while framing the assessment, noticed that the assessee having Account No.0815113100778 with Oriental Bank of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... available on record. I find that Ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue in para 5.3 to 5.3.6 by observing as under:- 5.3. "Ground 3 &.6 pertain to an addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- on account of cash deposit of Rs. 13,00,000/- in the bank account of appellant. As per ITS data, AO observed that assessee was having account with Oriental Bank of Commerce bearing a/c no, 08151131000778 and has deposited cash of Rs. 13,00,000/- on 23.10.2009. Since, assessee did not furnish detail regarding source of cash deposited in his bank, Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained income. During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted that appellant company is facilitator of real estate company whereby it has agreements with ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount. However, no details except the voter ID card/PAN has been submitted regarding the claim that the amounts were received from agriculturists. No confirmation has been filed from any of these parties neither any other details regarding the identity of the credit, creditworthiness and genuineness has been submitted. Further, with respect to the claim that amount of Rs. 275000/- was cash balance available, it is seen that appellant has also not submitted any evidence in support to the claim that the amount of Rs. 2,75,000/- was on account of cash balance available with it. Therefore, the onus cast on the Appellant has not been discharged. 5.3.2. As such, it is apparent that Appellant has not explained the nature and source of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 to 3 raised by the assessee are rejected. 11. Ground No.4 is against not accepting the loss of Rs. 43,525/- from business. 12. Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has not filed original return of income therefore, the authorities below were justified in not allowing the business loss. 13. I have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record. The assessee has neither given any justification regarding loss nor filed any supporting evidences. Therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere in the finding of authorities below, the same is hereby affirmed. 14. Ground No.5 raised by the assessee is against not admitting the additional evidences. 15. Ld. Sr. DR pointed out that the assessee has not given any....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... make the payments to the farmers. 21. Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee has not substantiated its claim. 22. I have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and perused the material available on record. I am of the considered view that the onus was upon the assessee to explain the debit and credit entries in the bank accounts. In the absence of supporting evidences, I do not see any infirmity in the order of authorities below, the same is thereby affirmed. 23. Ground No.9 raised by the assessee is against the alleged charging of interest u/s 234A & 234B of the Act, the same being consequential in nature hence, rejected. 24. Ground No.10 raised by the assessee is against non-providing the suffi....