2025 (10) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against quantum assessment and other in penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 23.03.2018. Both appeals are arising out same assessment year (AY) 2010-11. Therefore, with the consent of both the parties, both the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are decided by common order to avoid conflicting decision. The quantum appeal in ITA No.1030/Srt/2024 is treated as lead case. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in re-opening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act and issuing notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of the hearing of the appeal." 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) of the assessee submits that there is delay of 256 days in both the appeals before the tribunal. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that delay in filing appeals are neither intentional nor deliberate. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that first appeal before ld CIT(A) was filed in the year 2017, which later on migrated to faceless regime. The previous consultant of assessee made compliance in response to notice issued by Ld.CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act. Thereafter, order was not communicated to assessee or his previous c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....other credits are treated as business receipt, the cash receipt cannot be treated separately. The assessee is engaged in the business of retails trading of clothes, such fact is accepted by the lower authorities. The cash deposits are part of business receipt. Before Ld.CIT(A) assessee filed complete details, still, the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the action of Assessing Officer. The Ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of CIT vs. Subodh Gupta (2015) 54 taxmann.com 343 (Del) wherein it was held that in absence of any material to show net profit rate, presumptive net profit rate @ 8% as stipulated in section 44AD could be taken for estimation of income though said provision is not applicable to the assessee. The ld AR of the assessee also re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are condoned. Now adverting to the merit of the case. 5. We find that during assessment the Assessing Officer (AO) noted that assessee has made cash deposit of Rs. 23,31,00/- in his bank account. Further there was a credit of Rs. 39,57,606/- thus aggregating of total Rs. 62,88,606/- in the same bank account. The AO that on show cause to assessee, the assesse filed to file reply and source of such cash and other credits. The AO treated the credit of Rs. 39.57 lacs and business income and taxed the same by applying provision of section 44AD and estimated income @ 8%, thereby added Rs. 3,16,608/-. However, the entire cash of Rs. 23.31 lacs were added separately. Thus, the AO made total addition of Rs. 26,47,610/- (23,31,000+3,16,608). On a....