SHRI JATIN M. SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(4),, AHMEDABAD

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

The instant appeal has been filed by the assessee before us against the order dated 20.01.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-Ahmedabad-5 [Ld.CIT(A) in short] for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arising out of the order dated 15.03.2016 passed by the ITO, Ward-5(3)(4), Ahmedabad.

- 2 - ITA No.500/Ahd/2017 Shree Krishna Cargo vs. ITO Asst.Year – 2013-14 3. The brief facts leading to the case is that the assessee filed his return of income on 30.09.2013 declaring total income at Rs.3,56,490/- which was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). However, a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act on scrutiny was issued on 26.09.2014 upon the assessee. Subsequently, in response to the detailed questionnaire dated 03.03.2016, the assessee represented before the Assessing Officer (AO) along with detailed documents. The assessee has shown income from partnership as well as ‘other sources’. Upon verification statement of IndusInd Bank it reveals that the assessee has made substantial cash deposit in the said account. The statement furnished by the assessee shows deposits of Rs.7,02,700/- out of which peak amount is Rs.5,49,900/-. On 11.03.2016, the assessee offered the said amount of Rs.5,49,900/- for taxation as unexplained. The AO thus added the same to the total income of the assessee as income from undisclosed source against which the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), but without success.

- 3 - ITA No.500/Ahd/2017 Shree Krishna Cargo vs. ITO Asst.Year – 2013-14 Mahesh B. Shah vs. CIT 238 ITR 130 (Ker.) and Ramesh Chandra & Co. vs. CIT 168 ITR 375 (Bom.) wherein it was held that once the appellant has agreed for some addition before the Ld. AO, then the appellant does not have any right to prefer any appeal before higher forum against agreed addition unless he proves that the addition was made under threat or coercion. In the instant case, since no such statement towards agreement for addition by the assessee was under any threat or coercion is on record, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the same.

6.1. The Ld. Advocate appearing for the assessee relied upon the judgement passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Ld. Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2011-12. The judgements cited by the assessee in support of his contention for deletion of addition has been considered by us, the relevant portion whereof is as follows:-

“There is no dispute that Rs.39,00,300/- was found to be deposited in the Savings Bank account with IndusInd Bank in A.Y.2011-12 and Rs.13,10,400/- was found to be deposited in AY 2012-13. It is equally true that the explanation of the assessee is without any substance. However, at the same time, on perusing the ledger account of IndusInd Bank, we find that whenever the cash was deposited, it was immediately transferred to M/s. Shri Krishna Cargo. Therefore, the contentions that the same forms part of the business receipts cannot be brushed aside lightly.

The assessee has not furnished any detail in support of its claim of business receipts. In our considered opinion and considering the manner in which the cash was deposited and transmitted to the firms account, 50% of the cash deposited should be treated as the income of the assessee. We modify the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the A.O. to treat 50% of the cash deposited as undisclosed income of the assessee.”

6.2. Considering the submissions made by the Ld. AR and the judgement passed by the Coordinate Bench in assessee’s own case for the AYs 2011-12 & 2012-13(supra), in the similar set of facts, we respectfully following the same, modify the Ld. CIT(A)’s

- 4 - ITA No.500/Ahd/2017 Shree Krishna Cargo vs. ITO Asst.Year – 2013-14 order and direct the AO to treat 50% of cash deposited as undisclosed income of the assessee.

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation ..4.7.18 (dictation-pad 11- pages attached at the end of this appeal-file) 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …05.7.18 3. Other Member… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S…………….. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement…… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S…….17.9.18 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk…………………17.9.18 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order………………