2026 (8) TMI 1471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessee is a Doctor by profession and did not file the return of income. The AO received information that the assessee has received substantial amount of professional fees and that the assessee has also entered into certain purchase and sale of shares. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee neither filed the return of income nor responded to any of the notices issued by the A.O and therefore the A.O completed the assessment u/.s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act assessing the income at Rs. 38,48,710/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that as per the provisions of section 44AD....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rn of income is filed is not approved by the Section. 4. Holding both purchases of equity shares made for Rs. 1,14,446 and sales of Rs. 1,23,975 as taxable is not correct, instead of the difference of Rs. 9,529 alone. 5. Treating cost of equlty shares of Rs. 1,14,446 as unexplained investment under section 69A is not proper, while professional income exceeding this amount was available. 6. For these and other reasons, which may be stated at the time of hearing of the appeal, it is prayed that the income assessed may kindly be reduced by Honourable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal." 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee being a Doctor by profession is covered under th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessment proceedings. The A.O., therefore, treated the entire professional receipts as the income of the assessee. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that 50% of the professional receipts may be considered as income, referring to the presumptive basis provided u/s. 44ADA of the Act. The CIT(A), however, rejected the claim mainly on the ground that the assessee had not filed the return of income. In the present appeal, we are not called upon to decide the question as to whether the assessee could formally avail the benefit of section 44ADA in the absence of a return filed by him. The question before us is whether, on the facts of the case, the entire gross professional receipts of Rs. 35,01,500/- can be treated as the income of the as....