TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2093
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2), Mumbai, u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), dated 12.12.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Grounds taken by the Assessee are reproduced as under: "1. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred both in law and on the facts in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer of making addition of Rs. 12,02,500/- under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on account of unexplained cash deposit made in the bank account without considering the submissions made by the Appellant and rejecting the explanation and requisite documents submitted during the course of appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT (Appeals). 2. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT (Appeals....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Ld. A.O. that the Appellant's case does not qualify for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962 without considering the fact that the Appellant was not in receipt of the notice dated 20.11.2018 issued under section 143(2) and 142(1) wherein the Appellant was required to explain the source of cash deposit of Rs. 12,02,500/- made in the bank account thereby preventing the Appellant from producing the evidence to explain the source of cash deposit which he was called upon to produce by the Ld. Assessing Officer vide the aforesaid notice. 6. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred both in law and on the facts in approving the action of the Ld. A.O. of completing the reassessment for the year under consid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Mumbai. Since assessee did not file his return of income, the sources of said cash deposit could not be verified which led to issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, dated 27.03.2018. 3.1. Assessee was required to furnish his explanation along with documentary evidences to substantiate the source of deposit of cash in his bank account. Assessee claimed that he had been regularly filing his return of income against the stated PAN "AQAPK7595C". However, there was another PAN allotted to the assessee i.e. "AIVPM1776C" which was mistakenly given to the Standard Chartered Bank for the account where deposit of cash had taken place. Assessee was asked to establish that this deposit of cash in Standard Chartered Bank account has been duly conside....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....why the assessee will do any unfruitful exercise of withdrawing from the ATM and made deposits in cash. This seems an afterthought to match the entries. The cash deposits of Rs. 3,60,100/- therefore remained unverified. 3. The total cash sales during the year to the tune of Rs 3,78,950/- is shown, however, no documentary evidence for these sale proceeds is brought on record. Therefore, the same cannot be verified. 4. Data processing fees of Rs 2,70,480/- is entire receipt in cash. However, the assessee has not submitted any bills/ invoices/voices/work completion certificate etc which substantiates claim of receipts. 4.2. Assessee furnished his rejoinder to the remand report but could not evidently and corroboratively co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort has factually dealt with the case of the assessee, where nothing corroborative is brought on record for the claim made, justifying and explaining the source of deposit of cash. Accordingly, the additions so made ought to be sustained. 6. We have considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused the material on record. There is no dispute on existence of two PAN with the assessee. There is nothing brought on record to demonstrate that one of the PAN has been surrendered by the assessee after coming to his knowledge of there being two PAN in his name. The only document furnished is of requesting the bank to update the regular PAN which is made by the assessee after passing of the impugned assessment order with the bank. E....