INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-58(3), NEW DELHI, THIRD FLOOR, D BLOCK, VIKAS BHAWAN, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. DEEPAK AGGARWAL, ANAND VIHAR

This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 27.10.2023 passed by the NFAC, Delhi in relation to assessment year 2017-18 on the following ground:-

Brief facts of the care are that on perusal of the information available on ITS data and the bank account statements, AO noticed that during the FY 2016-17 the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs. 2,79,34,630/- in his account with HDFC Bank, Rs. 13,97,500/- in his account and Rs. 4,20,000/- in his account with Punjab National Bank respectively. AO noted that assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 2,98,00,130/- during the FY 2016-17 in his bank accounts with HDFC Bank and Axis Bank. Since the assessee has failed to offer any explanation despite the plethora of opportunities, thus there was no option but only to treat the cash deposited by the assessee during the FY 2016-17 as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. Therefore, an amount of Rs. 2,98,00,130/- was added in the hands of the assessee u/s. 69A of the Act.

Upon assesse’s appeal, Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding as under:- “5. Perusal of the return of income reveals that the appellant declared receipts of Rs. 9,48,469/- only from sale of services. Further the books of account are not audited and no audit report is filed, alongwith the return. Thus the reply of the assessee is incorrect that the accounts are audited. Notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) calling for information were duly served on the email id given by the assessee in the return of income. The assessee did not made any compliance to these notices. Hence, the assessment was completed u/s. 144 of the Act by making an addition of Rs. 2,98,00,130/- on account of unexplained deposits.

Against the above order, Revenue is in appeal before us.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issue of notice for hearing, hence, we are proceeding exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.

We have heard the ld. DR and perused the records. We note that CIT(A) has gone into the past records of the assessee and has found that in assessment year 2011-12 and 2012-13 assessment has been framed u/s. 144 of the Act by computing income @ 30% of the Gross Profit. Ld. CIT(A) has treated the cash deposits of Rs.2,98,00,130/- as business receipts and thereafter directed that 30% of the same should be treated as profit and accordingly Rs. 89,40,039/- has been computed as profit chargeable to tax. In our considered opinion, ld. CIT(A) has taken a correct view which does not need any interference on our part, accordingly, we uphold the same.