TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 939
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and cash deposit in saving Bank account is more than turnover in Bank account of BBN motors"(As per ITS details) and later on left current account mentioned supra and made addition of Rs.8.57 Lacs from the other current account No.5005-3185-861 of appellant, by suo-motto widening the scope of limited scrutiny, which is ultra-vires to the CBDT circular and order was void-ab-initio. 3. That Id. CIT(A) wrongly ignored that, the ld. A.O overlooked the CBDT instruction No-20/15 dated 29-12-15, while issuing the first notice u/s. 143(2) dated 1-08-16 and notice is bad in law, as-well-as, Ultra-vires to the board circular being not mentioning scope of enquiry and reason for selection. 4. That no permission of Pr. CIT was accorded by A.O before widening the scope of limited scrutiny and order of A.O is void-ab-initio. 5. That the ld. CIT(A) has wrongly ignored that the A.O has not given telescopic benefit of total cash deposit of Rs.8,57,000/- vs. total cash withdrawn of Rs.7,57,959 during the year from the same current A/c No. 5005-3185-861 of the appellant, before confirming addition of Rs.8,57,000/." 3. During the course of hearing, the assessee has also r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nored that, the ld. A O overlooked the CBDT instruction no. 20/15 dated 29-12-15, while issuing the notice u/s 142(1) dated 22-12-17 and notice is bad-in-law, as well as, Ultra-vires to the board circular being not mentioning scope of enquiry and reason for selection. Ground No. 4 That no permission of Pr. CIT was accorded by A.O before widening the scope of limited scrutiny and order of A.O is void-ab-initio. Arguments : 1) That assessee filed the return for A.Y 2015-16 declaring a total income of Rs. 269600, as per Para-1 of A.O's order. The break-up of the income is as under, as per Para 6.1 of CIT(A)'s order :- Amount in Rs. Income from Salary = 326826 Income from Business u/s 44AD = 66531 Income from other Sources = 89924 Gross Total Income = 402281 Less: Deduction u/s 80C, as per = 132683 Acknowledgement enclosed at page 23 Balance = 269598 2) The turnover shown by the assessee = Rs. 831625 u/s 44AD as per Para 2.6 of A.O's order and Para 6.1 of CIT(A)'s order and Net Profit is shown @ 8%, as per CIT(A)'s order, Para 6.1 = Rs. 66,531/-.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st to convert the limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny as per Para-3(d) of circular. Copy of Circular dtd. 26-09-14 vide no. 7/2014 indicates in Para-3 that the reasons for selection of cases are displayed to A.O in AST application, copy enclosed at page 39 to 40. The CBDT cleared their intentions at Para 3, vide circular dtd. 30-11- 17, copy enclosed at page 43 to 44 mentioning why the approval is needed to converting the limited scrutiny into complete scrutiny. Because the order-sheet was made perfunctorily by AO and this give rise to strong suspicion to a malafide intentions and officer concern has placed under suspension. In this case order-sheet was maintained in very perfunctorily manner and no reasons were mentioned for converting to limited scrutiny to complete scrutiny suo-moto and not mentioned at all of this conversion and further this complete scrutiny was without the approval of PCIT. Copy of order-sheet enclosed at page to 45 to 48 . 9) The Circular dtd. 14-07-16 bearing no. 5 enclosed at page 41 to 42 clearly indicates at Para-4 that after converting the case into complete scrutiny, the A.O may examine the additional issues besides the issues involved in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at page 13 to 14. The appellant has taken opening balance of cash in hand = Rs. 40,000/- (est.)being no account case as returns are filed u/s 44 AD and closing balance of cash is Rs.1,96,925/-. Cash deposits entries are at page 15 to 16. 2) The total cash deposits during the year is Rs. 8,57,000/- out of which cash sales was Rs. 831625/-, hence the excess amount of Rs 25,375/- was deposited out of profits earned by the appellant during the year, as business income declared and accepted by A.O amounting to Rs. 66,531/-. 3) The Id. A.O cannot blow hot and cold because at one hand he has accepted appellant's returned income and on the other hand he has made addition of Rs. Rs.8,57,000/- and this amount has arisen out of cash sales = Rs.831625/- and balance cash of Rs 25,375/-out of total profit shown amounting to Rs. 66,531/-. If the A.O is allowed to do so, then that will tantamount to double addition. The matter is covered by the following case law ACIT vs. M/s Hirapanna Jewellers (2020) ITA No. 253/Viz/2020 96 ITR (Trib) 0024 Copy enclosed at page 64 to 81. . Prayer:- That the addition is liable to be delet....