Santosh Kumar Keshari, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 25(3), Kolkata
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 190/KOL/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2011-2012
Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Santosh Kumar Keshari….…………………..………………..…………………………………..……….……..Appellant 14/15, Topsia Road Tiljala Kohinoor Market Kolkata – 700 039 [Pan : Agvpk 4645 G] Income Tax Officer, Ward-25(3), Kolkata………………………………………...…….……….......Respondent Appearances By: Shri V. Dasgupta, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit, D/R. Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 2Nd , 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : August 24Th , 2018 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata, (Hereinafter The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’), Dt. 22/12/2016, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Assessee Is An Individual & The Assessing Officer States That He Is In The Business Of Rejected Shoes. He Filed His Return Of Income For The Impugned Assessment Year 2011-12, On 22/03/2012, Declaring Total Income At Rs.1,51,154/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings. The Assessee Was Asked To Explain A Deposit Of A Sum Of Rs.54,82,600/-, In Cash In The Bank Account Maintained By The Assessee With Sbi, Picnic Garden Branch, Kolkata. The Assessee Explained That The Deposits Were Made In The Said Account From His Daily Sales To Local Parties. It Was Explained That Monies Collected From Street Vendors, Who Sold Rejected Shoes Were Deposited In The Account & Withdrawals Were From Atm To Make Payments For Purchases. The Assessing Officer Found That No Evidence Was Filed By The Assessee In Support Of These Contention. As The Assessee Has Disclosed Turnover Of Rs.10,18,276/-, The Difference Of Rs.44,64,324/- Was Added As Income. Aggrieved The Assessee Carried The Matter In Appeal, Without Success.
Section 250
…credit method to arrive at the undisclosed income of the assessee in the undisclosed bank account No.SB 6664 with the Syndicate bank.” Reference may also be drawn to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Smt. P.K.Noorjehan reported in 237 ITR 570(SC) wherein their lordships have held that mere unsatisfactoriness of the explanation offered by the assessee, does not, and need not, automatically result in deeming the value of investment to be the income of the assessee. That is still a matter within the discretion of the officer and, therefore, of the Tribunal. In other words, the discretion…
