RAJESH RUHIL,ROHTAK vs. ITO,WARD-5, ROHTAK

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Rohtak dated 16.12.2019.

The only issue pressed by the ld AR pertains to addition of Rs. 39 lacs made by the AO on account of deposits in the bank. 4. We have gone through the entire factum and heard the arguments of both the parties. The issue narrows down to as to whether the assessee had JCB machines JS140TE and JS 200 which have been purportedly sold to two different parties namely Ramvir Ashok ,Brahm putr on 01.04.2012 and on 22.08.2012. The only issue to be examined is whether the assessee had these machineries available with him so that he could sell these machines to the parties in cash. The AO is directed to verify the same and the assessee is directed to submit the details before the AO with regard to existence of these machines along with the details of purchase of machines at the relevant time. The existence of machines proves the sale of machines and the failure to prove of the existence of machines would lead to addition of these amounts in the hands of the assessee. The AO may take decision in accordance with the provision of the Act after due enquiry.