NARESH KUMAR,VILLAGE SUDHAL vs. ITO WARD 2, YAMUNA NAGAR, HUDA, JAGADHARI

From case records, it emerges that the assessee earned contractual receipts of Rs.20.62 Lacs and declared income of 8% on presumptive basis. However, the case was reopened to verify the source of cash deposit for Rs.12.60 Lacs. In the absence of any cogent reply as forthcoming from the assessee, the deposits as well as presumptive income was added back to the declared income of Rs.4.17 Lacs and total income was assessed at Rs.18.42 Lacs. During first appeal, the assessee furnished sale deed of agricultural land and stated to have received certain amount on sale of agricultural lands. The Ld. CIT(A) granted benefit of Rs.3.52 Lacs and confirmed remaining addition of Rs.10.72 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

From the facts, it could be seen that the assessee has earned presumptive income for which it is not required to maintain the books of accounts. The assessee has reflected contractual receipts of Rs.20.62 Lacs which are more than the deposits as made by the assessee. As per assessee’s submissions, it has made withdrawals which have subsequently been deposited in the savings bank account. Further, the assessee has returned income of Rs.4.17 Lacs. All these sources have not been factored in while examining the claim of the assessee. In our opinion, it these sources are considered, nothing would remain unexplained in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, we delete the impugned addition of Rs.10.72 Lacs as sustained in the impugned order. The Ld. AO is directed to re-compute the income of the assessee.