Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: empanelment :: due date for vat payment :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: VAT Audit :: form 3cd :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: TDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: VAT RATES
From the Courts »
 Order of a Four-Member Appellate Authority constituted under Chartered Accountants Act is Valid: Delhi HC
 Emami Infrastructure Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Bar Council of India vs. A. K. Balaji & Ors (Supreme Court)
 ITO vs. Venkatesh Premises Co-op Society Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-I Vs. Smt. Ritu Singal
 Vinod Kumar Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-17
 How you can gift and still save tax on top of HRA, tuition fee, more Income Tax Returns (ITR) filing top hack

Utsov Dhowan, C/o PVS and Associates, 57, Patva Chambers, 104/108 Clive Road, Opp. Masjit Station, Mumbai-400009 Vs. Income Tax OfficerWard 19(3)(4), Mumbai.
November, 05th 2015
                ,   "" 


                  ./I.T.A. No.7516/Mum/2013
                 (   / Assessment Year:2008-09)
 Utsov Dhowan,            / Income Tax Officer-
 C/o PVS and Associates,        Ward 19(3)(4),
 57, Patva Chambers,            Mumbai.
 104/108 Clive Road,
 Opp. Masjit Station,
       ( /Appellant)       ..   ( / Respondent)

        ./   ./PAN. :AGFPD7565G

            / Appellant by              Shri Dharmesh Shah
            /Respondent by              Shri Pramod Nikalje

           / Date of Hearing                 :3.11.2015
           /Date of Pronouncement:3.11.2015

                               / O R D E R
Per B R Baskaran, AM:

       The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated
19.11.2013 passed by the ld. CIT(A)-18, Mumbai and it relates to the
assessment year 2008-09.

2.     The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the ld.CIT(A) in
confirming the addition of Rs.17,37,109/- made by the AO u/s 69A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961.
                                     2                 I T A N o . 7 5 1 6 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3

3.     We heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee filed its
return of income for the year under consideration declaring the total
income of Rs.1,70,230/-. During the course of assessment proceedings,
the AO noticed that the assessee has maintained a bank account with M/s
Axis   Bank,   wherein   he   has   deposited   amounts      aggregating               to
Rs.17,37,109/- by way of cash and other deposits.     The assessee did not
furnish any explanation before the AO and also did not co-operate with the
AO. Hence, the AO completed the assessment to the best of his judgment
by assessing the above said sum of Rs.17,37,109/- as            income of the

4.     In the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee's
father furnished an affidavit stating that the above said deposits represent
money given by him to the assessee. However, no evidence was furnished
to corroborate the submissions made in the affidavit and hence the ld.
CIT(A) rejected the same.       The assessee also took the alternative
argument that peak amount of deposits should have been taken as
income. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the said contention also on the reasoning
that the assessee did not furnish any evidence to show that cash deposits
were made on different occasions. Accordingly, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed
the appeal filed by the assessee.

5.     With regard to the affidavit furnished by the father of the assessee,
we find that the Ld CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the same, since the
contents of the said affidavit was not substantiated with evidences. Before
us, the ld.counsel of the assessee submitted a copy of bank statement
/account as well as the peak credit workings and accordingly prayed that
the peak credit balance may be taken as the income of the assessee.
Though the ld.DR strongly objected to the said plea of the Ld A.R, in the
                                     3                  I T A N o . 7 5 1 6 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3

interest of natural justice, we are of the view this alternative plea of the
assessee requires examination. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the
ld. CIT(A) with regard to the decision taken by him on the issue of peak
credit and restore the same to the file of the       AO with a direction to
examine the claim of the assessee by duly considering the bank account
and other explanations that may be furnished by the assessee.                      After
affording necessary opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the AO may
take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

6.     In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly
allowed for statistical purpose.

       Pronounced accordingly on     3rd November, 2015.

                                    3rd Nov, 2015    
            Sd                                          sd
      (PAWAN SINGH)                              ( B.R. BASKARAN)
     JUDICIAL MEMBER                               ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

 Mumbai:         3rd Nov, 2015.
.../ SRL , Sr. PS
    /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.     / The Respondent.
3.     () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.      / CIT concerned
5.     ,   ,                      /
      DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6.      / Guard file.

                                                           / BY ORDER,
True copy
                                                      (Asstt. Registrar)
                                           ,  /ITAT, Mumbai
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Content Management System development CMS development Content Management Solutions CMS Solutions Content Management Services CMS Services CMS Software

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions