TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (4) TMI 997
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e that were beyond the control of the assessee, which are neither intentional nor deliberate. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing. We have heard the Ld.AR and find reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeals. Hence, the delay is condoned and the appeals are admitted for hearing. I.T.A.No.98/Viz/2019, A.Y.2011-12 2. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)]-3, Visakhapatnam in ITA No.263/2015-16/CIT(A)-3/VSP/2017-18 dated 15.10.2018, arising out of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"). Briefly stated the facts are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for the A.Y.2011-12, admitting total income of Rs.3,74,950/-. A search and seizure operation was carried out in the case of the assessee on 13.07.2011 and the case was centralised to Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam on 28.10.2011. Subsequently, notice u/s 153A of the Act for the A.Y.2011-12 was issued on 05.06.2012. In response to the notice, the assessee filed return of income, admitting the same income. Subsequently, notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 03....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bank accounts. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing. 5. Ground No.1 and 3 are general in nature and needs no adjudication. 6. Ground No.2 is with respect to sustaining the addition of Rs.18,74,950/- made by the AO. The main contention of the Ld.AR is that the assessee has received Rs.15,00,000/- by way of cheque against sale cum GPA agreement from Sri S.Veera Raghavareddy as advance. The Ld.AR further submitted that the same Rs.15,00,000/- has been considered for tax, while disallowing Rs.62,48,500/- and also while disallowing Rs.25,57,294/-. The Ld.AR referred to page No.17 of the order of the Ld.AO, detailing the breakup of Rs.25,57,294/- and pointed out that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- also included. Therefore, the Ld.AR pleaded that the same amount cannot be taxed twice and prayed for relief. 7. Per contra, the Ld.DR relied on the order of the Ld.AO and pleaded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground. 8. We have heard both the sides and perused the material placed on record. Admittedly, the assessee has received Rs.15,00,000/- by way of cheque from Shri Veera Raghava Reddy as loan against property by way of execution of GPA cum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wards unexplained cash deposits - Rs.12,07,534/- (b) Addition towards unexplained Marriage expenses - Rs.7,94,239/- 10. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee furnished the same information as furnished before the Ld.AO. Considering the replies and submissions made by the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A), by providing substantial relief, has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee on this ground. 11. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us by raising the following 3 grounds : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Visakhapatnam is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Visakhapatnam is not justified in partly sustaining the addition of Rs.1,09,750/- out of the total addition of Rs.2,19,500/- made by the assessing officer towards unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing. 12. Ground No.1 and 3 are general in nature, which needs no adjudication. 13. Ground No.2 is with respect to sustaini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee was asked to furnish explanation regarding the sources of cash deposits. The assessee furnished written explanation, stating that out of the cash deposits of Rs.4,05,000/-, an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- was received from the Association of Transport Department of Technical Officers, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in connection with the association activities, towards reimbursement of expenses like Transport, Telephone expenses, printing and stationery, xerox etc and the balance amount of Rs.1,65,000/- is gross receipt from real estate commission. But the assessee failed to produce any supporting evidence with regard to the sources of deposit of Rs.2,40,000/- and in the absence of supporting evidence, the AO treated the amount of Rs.2,40,000/- as unexplained income and charged to tax u/s 69 of the Act. The AO passed assessment order on 30.03.2014 by making addition of Rs.2,40,000/- in the form of unexplained cash deposits and Rs.1,23,450/- in the form of unexplained cash deposits (real estate commission) and raised a demand of Rs.63,450/-. 17. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and reiterated the submissions made before the AO,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rial placed on record. As admitted by the Ld.AR, the assessee could not produce any vouchers before the revenue authorities or before us. The Ld.CIT(A) has therefore, rightly considered the issue based on the facts and circumstances of the case and has held as follows : "(ii) Regarding the credit of Rs.2,40,000/-, it is the contention of the appellant that the amount was deposited by Sri P.Ravinder Kumar, General Secretary, Association of Transport Department Technical Officers. The fact that the appellant is holding the post of General Secretary fo All India Federation of Motor Vehicles is not disproved by the Assessing Officer. It is logical that the appellant would have incurred some expenditure, whether it is Rs.2,40,000/- or otherwise needs to be seen. The appellant had not produced any vouchers before me. In that event, it is felt that the disallowance of 50% of expenditure would meet both the ends of justice. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to calculate the disallowance of amount at 50% of Rs.2,40,000/- as it is not verifiable in nature. (iii) The remaining amount of Rs.1,65,000/- (i.e.Rs.4,05,000 - Rs.2,40,000) represents real estate commission. It is the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls)-3, Visakhapatnam is not justified in partly sustaining the addition of Rs.29,800/- out of the total addition of Rs.6,25,000/- made by the assessing officer towards agricultural income. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing. 27. Ground No. 1 and 3 are general in nature which needs no adjudication. 28. Ground No.2 is with respect to sustaining the addition of Rs.29,800/- out of the total addition of Rs.6,25,000/- made by the AO towards agricultural income. The Ld.AR contended that the assessee owns Ac.29.76 cnts of agricultural land and cultivating cash crops such as casuarina, pulses, cashew etc and produced income certificate from the Village Revenue Officer (VRO) in support of her claim. The Ld.AR further contended that the AO, rejected the claim of the assessee without verifying the records and without bringing any contrary facts on record. During the assessment proceedings, the AO held that the assessee has not produced any evidence with regard to earning of agricultural income and the assessee was showing the agricultural income from the agricultural lands which were also belonging to her son. The AO further held that the agricultural income was infla....