VIJAYKUMAR MANGILALJI CHORDIYA, NASHIK V. National Faceless Assessment Centre, DELHI

ITA 1134/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0187 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1134/PUN/2024 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vijaykumar Mangilalji Chordiya, Row House No.4, Sai Darshan, Prashant Nagar, Pathardi Phata, Nashik – 422 010, Maharashtra PAN : AIFPC8037L Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 05.04.2024 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under : The appellant is an individual, filed the Return of Income for the A.Y. 2014-15 on 13.12.2014 disclosing income of Rs.4,24,100/-. Subsequently, based on the information available on Insight Portal that assessee made a cash deposit of Rs.4,55,69,117/- with Renuka Mata Multistate Credit Society Ltd. during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the Assessing Officer (AO) formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Satyajit Mandal Date of hearing : 12.08.2024 Date of pronouncement : 12.08.2024 ITA No.1134/PUN/2024 2 Accordingly, the assessment was reopened u/s.147 after recording the reasons and issued notice u/s.148 on 31.03.2021. Notices u/s.142(1) was also issued to the assessee on 08.07.2021 & 17.12.2021. The assessee had failed to respond either to notice issued u/s.148 or notices u/s.142(1). Finally, the AO issued a show cause notice to the assessee on 27.03.2022. In response to the show cause notice, the assessee submitted explanation stating as under : “My main source of Income is Advisory and Brokers charges. I also lends temporary advances, loan to businessmen or friends by taking money from some other parties. I earned commission or charges on such transactions. Further the assessee added that as per information with the department I have made cash deposit of Rs.4,55,69,117/- as a member of the society in the account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multistate Credit Society Ltd. However, these transactions include cash deposits and other deposits/transfers too.” 3. On consideration of the above explanation, the AO treated the entire cash deposits as turnover of the assessee and estimated the income @8% of the total income. Accordingly, the AO vide order dated 30.03.2022 completed the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 read with section 144B of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC by contending that the AO ought not to have treated the entire cash deposits as turnover of the assessee and estimated the income at 8% and filed written submissions in support of the contentions. The CIT(A)/NFAC had duly considered the above submissions, confirmed the action of the AO in the absence of any evidence in support of the contention that source for the cash deposits were out of transfers from other accounts etc. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. ITA No.1134/PUN/2024 3 6. When the matter was called on, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice. 7. I had carefully perused the material on record and heard the ld. Sr. DR. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee made a cash deposit to the tune of Rs.4,55,69,117/- with Renuka Mata Multistate Credit Society Ltd. In the absence of proper plausible explanation in support of the cash deposits, the AO treated the entire cash deposits as turnover of the business of the banking carried on by the assessee and assessed income at 8% of such deposits. On appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, the action of the AO was confirmed in the absence of any evidence in support of the contention that the assessee made a cash deposit of only Rs.1,404/-. The assessee has not filed any evidence in support of the sources for the cash deposits made. Therefore, the CIT(A)/NFAC had rightly confirmed the action of the AO. I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, accordingly the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 12 th day of August, 2024. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 12 th August, 2024. Satish ITA No.1134/PUN/2024 4 आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.