PALLAVI PAL ,NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, ITO, WARD-2(4), NOIDA, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee raises three substantive issues in the instant appeal i.e. alleged double addition of Form 26AS figures, cash deposits addition of Rs.16,53,000/- added as an unexplained and net profits @ 10% on gross receipts amounting to Rs.12,45,190/-; respectively. Pallavi Pal

I have given my thoughtful consideration and vehement rival stand. I am of the considered view that so far as the assessee’s first and foremost issue of alleged double addition of the corresponding Form 26AS figures is concerned, the same more requires the learned Assessing Officer’s afresh factual verification to this effect. This ground is accordingly accepted as allowed for statistical purposes.

Next comes cash deposits addition of Rs.16,53,000/- wherein the Revenue’s vehement contention is that the assessee could not explain source thereof and therefore, the same deserves to be upheld. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee has been already assessed @ 10% of her other gross receipts. The only inference which arises in such a situation that the assessee’s cash deposits infact are her undeclared business receipts only which also deserve to be assessed @ 10%. Learned Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to finalize his consequential computation in very terms.

Learned Counsel lastly contends both lower authorities have wrongly assessed the assessee @ 10%. I am of the considered view that given the fact that she has failed to plead and prove the audited book results as representing correct sate Pallavi Pal

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 07/01/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)