SRI DEEPAK KUMAR GUPTA,DHANBAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), DHANBAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 268/RAN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi04 March 2020AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal deleted the addition, finding that the credit instances from the wife's concerns exceeded the alleged difference in turnover. Therefore, the profit estimation in the assessee's hands was not justified as it did not represent the taxpayer's income.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 3,86,553/- on account of profit rate at 3.78% on an alleged difference in turnover treated as cash deposits. The AO noted two credit instances from the assessee's wife's proprietorship concerns.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO was justified in making an addition on account of profit rate on alleged cash deposits when the credits originated from the assessee's wife's business concerns.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH “SMC” RANCHI

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

आदेश /O R D E R (Oral) This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-Dhanbad’s order dated 21.08.2019 passed in case No.CIT(A), Dhanbad/10115/2017-18, involving proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Learned counsel representing assessee is fair enough in not pressing for his former two substantive grounds challenging validity of re-opening as well as FDR addition of Rs.48,000/-; respectively.

1.

Sh.Deepak Kr. Gupta Vs. ITO Wd-1(3) DHN Page 2 3. Next comes the sole surviving issue of profit rate addition @ 3.78% Rs.3,86,553/-; qua the alleged difference in turnover of Rs.1,02,26,270/- treated as alleged cash deposits. I notice from para-9 of the assessment order that the Assessing Officer has made it clear that two credit instances of Rs.40,75,861/- and Rs.95,81,597/- represented assessee’s wife Smt.Nirmala Gupta’s as many proprietorship concerns namely M/s Ganpati Sales and Anil Enterprises ; respectively. The aggregate of both these sums very well exceeds the alleged difference in turnover of Rs.1.02,26,270/- leaving no scope of any such profit estimation in assessee’s hands since not representing this taxpayer’s income. I accordingly delete the same. Necessary computation including that of interest shall follow as per law.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →