Abidi Yahiya Syed, Gurugram V. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurugram

ITA 1650/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3755 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift; FORM 26AS

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1650/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Abidi Yahiya Syed, N-5/18, 1 st Floor, DLF Phase-II, Gurgaon PAN No.AIRPS2592N Vs DCIT Circle -1 (1) Gurgaon (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 24/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 24/08/2022 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Gurgaon dated 28.12.2018 for A.Y.2014-15. 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 2 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of repetitive notices, therefore, we decided to proceed exparte. The DR was heard at length. Case records carefully perused. 4. The return of income of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS. 5. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings the AO noticed that certain cash deposits were recorded in the AIR, the details of which are as under :- 3 6. The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposited in bank account. On receiving no plausible reply the AO made the addition of Rs.4640000/-. Proceeding further the AO found that there is a mismatch of total receipts shown in the Profit and Loss account and the total receipts as per form 26AS. The assessee was asked to submit a reason for the same. On receiving no plausible reply the AO made the addition of Rs.4484865/-. Assessee raised the objections before the CIT(A). We find that the proceeding before the CIT(A) remained unattended though written submissions alongwith additional evidences were filed and on the basis of the submissions made by the assessee the CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.4640000/- and restricted the addition on account of differences in receipts as per form No.26AS to the extent of Rs.2485623/-. 7. We find that the source of cash deposit was explained to be gifts though details to the satisfaction of the AO were not furnished nor it was furnished before the CIT(A). In so far as the difference in the total receipts as per form No.26AS and as per Profit and Loss account is concerned we find that the CIT(A) has considered the grievance of the assessee factually and restricted the disallowance to Rs.2485263/-. A careful analysis and finding of the CIT(A) show that it does not require any modification. We, therefore, confirme the findings of the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 9. Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the parties on 24.08.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA* Date:- .08.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI