SHRI SURENDRA MALIK,SHAMLI vs. ITO, SHAMLI

It is a recalled matter inasmuch as the earlier ex parte order passed by the Bench was subsequently recalled vide its order dated 22.8.2016 in MA No.22/Del/2016.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.12,14,500/-. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee deposited a sum of Rs.19,13,500/- in his bank account on various dates. On being called upon to explain the source of such deposits, the assessee earlier stated that the deposits were made out of sale proceeds during the year. Later on, the stand was changed and it was put forth that the deposits were made out of sale proceeds of vehicles and advances received against sale of properties. The AO observed that the assessee was changing its stand about the source of deposits. Computing the peak credit, the AO made addition of Rs.12,15,100/- u/s 68 of the Act, which got confirmed in the first appeal. The assessee is aggrieved against the sustenance of this addition.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The ld. AR did not dispute that the sustenance of addition on peak credit. However, it was submitted that the peak credit was wrongly computed by the AO and the same got confirmed as such. A prayer was made that correct amount of peak credit be determined and added to the total income. The same was not controverted by the ld. DR. Under these circumstances, I set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of AO for computing the correct amount of peak credit for making addition, after allowing due opportunity to the assessee of being heard.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.