TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1356
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'Act') vide order dated 28.10.2019. 2. The first issue, on jurisdiction, in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in completing the assessment without issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 3. Brief facts are that assessment was completed ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act, vide order dated 28.10.2019 and AO treated the return filed by the assessee on 15.02.2019 as 'invalid' because the assessee has not filed return of income within the time allowed in the notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. The AO has recorded this fact in paras 2 & 3 as under:- "2. On verification of this office records, the assessee has not filed the return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 within the time allow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n its bank account and hence, to verify the genuineness of cash deposit, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 05.01.2018 calling the assessee to file return of income was issued. The time allowed vide this notice u/s. 142 of the Act by the Department was up to 31.03.2018 but assessee furnished the return of income on 15.02.2019 i.e., almost 10 months after the expiry of time allowed by the Department. Hence, the AO proceeded to frame the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act and finally assessment was framed as best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act, as the assessee neither filed any reply nor furnished any details. This fact is noted by the AO in paras 2 & 3 of his assessment order, which is already been reproduced in preceding para 3 and fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act and regularized the return of income. I don't buy this argument because processing of return u/s. 143(1) of the Act is just a formality and not regularization of return of income because AO while framing assessment u/s. 144 of the Act dated 28.10.2019 has specifically treated the return as invalid return and framed assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. Hence, non-issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is not fatal to this assessment and assessment is valid as per law. Hence, this issue of assessee's appeal is dismissed. 5. The next issue on merits in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in assessing the cash deposit made in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) during demonetization period am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Even now before us, the assessee apart from making bald statement that the deposit in SBNs during demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 is out of the turnover of the assessee and assessee has already declared the turnover at Rs. 75,52,940/-, no other source was explained. Even it was not explained that how this cash deposit in specified notes is included in the turnover by the assessee in its return of income. In the absence of any explanation or evidence, I have no alternative except to confirm the addition. 9. The next issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) estimating the profit rate at the rate of 8% on the total business turnover taking the figure of total cash deposits (excluding the bank....