HARISH BATRA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-45(1), DELHI, DELHI

Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Harish Batra, Vs Income Tax Officer, J-12/30, Ground Floor, Rajouri Ward-45(1), Garden, New Delhi-110027 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEKPB6386E Assessee by: Ms. Meenal Goyal, CA & Sh. Deepanshu Mehta, Adv. Revenue by : Ms. Ambika Agarwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 07.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 07.10.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076838833(1) dated 09.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Harish Batra 4. It is in this factual backdrop that the learned counsel invites the tribunal’s attention to page 758 comprising of the assessee’s P&L account for the relevant previous year wherein he had declared total sales of Rs.11,56,63,414/- from his regular business activity carried out in the name and style of M/s Krishna Supermarche in grocery business. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee’s regular books of account has been duly audited have been accepted in both the lower proceedings. The facts however remains that the assessee could not successfully explain the impugned cash deposits by way of filing the corresponding supportive evidence for the purpose of necessary factual verification and reconciliation of the figures in question. Be that as it may, it is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to assess the assessee’s impugned cash deposits at a lump sum GP rate of 6% with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.