TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1683
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee's appeal relating to Shri Prashant Ramjibhai Kandoliya, in ITA No. 430/Rjt/2017 for A.Y. 2010-11. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 430/Rjt/2017 for A.Y. 2010-11 are as follows: "1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-2, Rajkot erred in law as well as on facts in not appreciating the submission of the assessee and consequently in dismissing the appeal filed against the order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(4), Rajkot. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-2, Rajkot erred in law as well as on facts by upholding addition of Rs. 1,53,40,29,505/- being cash / cheque deposited into bank account of assessee for which addition was made by The Assessing Officer. The same is confirmed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-2, Rajkot despite specific findings of the Assessing Officer that assessee was engage in Shroff/cheque discounting business and name, address and PAN of beneficiaries are available with the Assessing Officer. 3. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-2, Rajkot erred in law as well as on fact by upholding addition of Rs. 1,53,40,295/- being commission income on ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in 30 days. Assessee was requested to file return within 30 days. u/s. 142(1)r.w.s 129 23.09.2016 28.09.2016 13.10.2016 Assessee was requested to file return within 30 days. u/s. 142(1) 20.10.2016 20.10.2016 28.10.2016 Assessee was requested to file return within 30 days. u/s. 143(3) 16.12.2016 20.12.2016 22.12.2016 Non attended 29.11.2016 The assessee filed a ROI along with letter intimating return filed u/s 139(1) may be treated as in response to notice u/s 148 of the IT. Act. on dtd. 29.11.2016 Show Cause notice issued 21.11.2016 25.11.2016 30.11.2016 Adjournment letter filed by the assessee on 30.11.2016 Further opportunity to show cause 20.12.2016 20.12.2016 23.12.2016 Assessee only filed reply dated 23.12.2016 5. In response to the statutory notices issued, the assessee, attended the proceedings from time to time and furnished reply of the notices. In order to verify the genuineness of the banking transactions, a summon u/s 131(1A) was issued to the assessee on 23rd June 2015 and statement of the assessee was recorded under oath on 29th June 2015. In the course....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order. 8. The assessing officer dealt with the reply of the assessee and held as follows: (i). The assessee's reply was duly considered and the same is not acceptable. It is the contention of the assessee that, he is engaged in cheque discounting business and earns commission income. But, this reply lacks credence because, even in the regular books of accounts and Income tax return, no commission income has been offered. So, this reply is an afterthought. (ii). Secondly, the assessee has relied upon the adverse inference drawn by this office in the show cause notice that the assessee is allowing those people who resort to under invoicing and thereby suppress their profit. In the reply, the assessee contends that the department is fully aware of the modus operandi and hence, the argument of commission income should be accepted. However, this contention is not acceptable. As per section 69A, when any person is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article and where such money is not recorded in the books of account, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the money, or the explanation ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces such persons, confirmations, cash books or ledgers etc, of the owners of cash or beneficiaries of cash, then the assessee might get relief of cash deposited to that extent. Then in that case, at least commission income remains added to the total income. (h). It is for this reason, that both the cash deposit and commission are added. (i). It needs to be appreciated that, the present activities of the assessee is a real menace to a growing economy. The persons like assessee, aids people in hiding their financial transactions and thereby, avoid taxes like income tax, VAT, excise, etc. This also aids in circumventing various other transactions from tax nets. Therefore, such menace has to be dealt with seriously. 9. In the reply dated 22.12.2016, the assessee contends that, this office has not done proper investigation. However, this is only a lame excuse. The onus is upon the assessee to prove the source of cash and explain it with supporting documentary evidences. No such onus has been discharged. Now the assessee is blaming the department. What can the department do, when the assessee himself is not co-operating in the proceedings. Therefore, the contention t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t cannot, however, act unreasonably. Therefore, after relying on judicial rulings the ld CIT(A) held that assessee has failed to explain the source of cash deposits in the bank accounts and therefore by virtue of provision of section 69A of the Act, impugned cash deposits held to be income of the assessee. 13. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 14. Learned Counsel for the assessee, argued that first of all, the reasons of reopening were not given the assessee, despite of repeated reminders, during the assessment proceedings, and reasons recorded by the assessing officer are bad in law. 15. Learned Counsel for assessee, on merit, submitted that the real income is to be taxed. The assessee is dealing in cash, which belongs to other persons and assessee is not owner of the money. The assessee is getting commission which can be taxed in the hands of the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer did not provide sufficient time to submit the name and address of the beneficiaries. Therefore, assessee could not submit this information during the assessment proceedings. The ld. Counsel also argued that only profit ele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was duly served upon the assessee. In response to notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee has filed returns of income declaring salary income of Rs 1,34,150/- on 29.11.2016." We find that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has not raised this issue and did not object the reopening of assessment. Thus, the reopening and jurisdiction of the AO to proceed with the re- assessment u/s. 147 of the Act is fully in compliance with the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court as held in GKN Drivsshafts. In view of these facts, the ground of appeal challenging the reopening is not entertainable. The objection raised by the assessee regarding the assumption of jurisdiction by assessing officer by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, is devoid of merits and facts. The assessee never objected to the issuance of the notice u/s 148 of the Act during the assessment proceedings. Besides, the Hon`ble Gujarat High Court in some of the recent judgments has held reopening on the basis of the information of the Investigation Wing is valid. In the case of Peass Industrial Engineers Pvt. Ltd 73 taxmannn.com 185(2016) (Gujarat) it was held whether at the instance of same m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss to the revenue because of the non-cooperative attitude of the assessee. Therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer, with the direction to the assessee to file the name and address of the beneficiaries and produce the beneficiaries before the assessing officer. The ld. Counsel for the assessee also argued before us that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer did not provide sufficient time to submit the name and address of the beneficiaries. Considering these arguments, we are of the view that entire lis should be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 20. We find that during the appellate proceedings, ld. CIT(A) passed a speaking order, narrating the facts that Assessing Officer having come in possession of information that the assessee has deposited huge cash in bank account and yet assessee had not filed the return of income. The AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act, after recording reasons and obtaining approval of the PCIT-2, Rajkot. In response, the assessee filed return declaring salary income of Rs 1,34,150/-. No commission income has been shown. During his statement recorded u/s 131(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade during assessment proceeding which have already been discussed above. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case and rival contentions, the ld.CIT(A) noticed that it uncontroverted that there are cash deposits of Rs. 1,53,40,29,505/- in the bank account of the assessee. Despite sufficient opportunity, neither at the assessment stage nor at the appellate stage the assessee has been able to prove with any plausible evidence that the deposits did not belong to him and that he only earned commission income from them, as alleged. The assessee has not given particulars of the alleged beneficiaries whose cash have been statedly deposited in his bank accounts. 21. We note that during the appellate proceedings, before ld CIT(A), the assessee has also contended in ground 4 and 7 that he was not granted sufficient opportunity to compile the detail of the beneficiaries. This ground is not tenable. However, the ld CIT(A) rejected this plea of the assessee and stated that the assessee has been given sufficient opportunity to explain the sources of deposits and assessee has not produced any evidence even at the appellate stage in support of his assertion. Before us, learned coun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly No NO NO NO Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 18.04.2016 and the assessment order passed on 26.05.2016 in this short period. The Ld. AO was having not sufficient time to issue notice u/s. 133/136(6) of the act and investigate the matter by the Ld. AO. No person beneficial detail submitted. ITA No. 17/Rjt/2023 143(2) 142(1) 142(1) Letter 12.07.2013 19.09.2013 NO NO Reply Reply Reply Reply 01.08.2013 14.02.2014 NO NO Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 14.12.2014 and the assessment order passed on 20.02.2014 in this short period. The Ld. AO was having not sufficient time to issue notice u/s. 133/136(6) of the act and investigate the matter by the Ld. AO. No person beneficial detail submitted. ITA No. 18/Rjt/2023 143(2) 142(1) 142(1) 142(1) Summon 30.07.2015 29.07.2015 15.08.2015 29.01.2016 02.02.206 Reply Reply Reply Reply Reply No No 09.09.2015 No 15.02.2016 Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 15.02.2016 and the assessment order passed on 22.03.2016 in this short period. The Ld. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eply Reply No 23.11.2016 22.11.2016 23.11.2016 12.12.2016 Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 12.12.2016 and the assessment order passed on 27.12.2016 in this short period. The Ld. AO was having not sufficient time to issue notice u/s. 133/136(6) of the act and investigate the matter by the Ld. AO. No person beneficial detail submitted. ITA No. 24/Rjt/2023 143(2) 142(1) 142(1) Letter 29.07.2016 24.08.2016 15.11.2016 05.12.2016 Reply Reply Reply Reply No 23.11.2016 22.11.2016 23.11.2016 12.12.2016 Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 12.12.2016 and the assessment order passed on 27.12.2016 in this short period. The Ld. AO was having not sufficient time to issue notice u/s. 133/136(6) of the act and investigate the matter by the Ld. AO. No person beneficial detail submitted. ITA No. 25/Rjt/2023 143(2) 142(1) 142(1) Letter 23.08.2016 24.08.2016 15.11.2016 05.12.2016 Reply Reply Reply Reply No 23.11.2016 22.11.2016 23.11.2016 12.12.2016 Because of the notice remain uncomplied with on 12.12.2016 and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l filed by the assessee (in ITA No. 429,430 & 358) are allowed for statistical purposes. 25. Now, we shall take appeals relating to Shri Chetan Harilal Bhalodiya, wherein we take ITA No.16/Rjt/2023 for A.Y. 2006-07, as a lead case. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee as per lead case in ITA No.16/Rjt/2023 are as under: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in confirming the additions made vide order under section 144 r.w.s. 263 of Act without affording constructive and real opportunity of hearing. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) grievously erred on facts as also in law in not considering the fact that such high pitched addition made was without giving prior and specific show cause notice. Therefore, only on this ground alone assessment order may kindly be quashed. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) grievously erred on facts as also in law in taking on record the additional evidences submitted under section 46A during the appellate proceedings only for the limited period where in fact such evidences submitted pertained to all the assessment years under appeal. Therefore, only on this ground alone assessment order may kindly be quashed. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) g....