I.T.O.-3(3), Mathura V. Sh. Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Mathura

ITA 273/AGR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 27320314 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ATHESHAM ANSARI
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHIB P SATSANGEE
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 ASST. YEAR : 2008-09 INCOME-TAX OFFICER, VS. SHRI RAJEEV KUMAR GUPTA, 3(3), MATHURA. 27, KRISHNA PURI, MATHURA. (PAN:AFMPG 9044 B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ATHESHAM ANSARI, JR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY` : SHRI SAHIB P. SATSANGEE, C.A. DATE OF HEARING : 12.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.02.2014 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA DATED 06.03.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT THE LD. CIT (A)-1, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS IN GIVING RELIEF OF RS.10,33,705/- OUT OF ADDITION OF RS.11,76,457/- BY ADMITTING AND ENTERTAINING NEW EVIDENCE OF P%L ACCO UNT PRODUCED DURING APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN WHICH GROSS RECEIPT S OF RS.18,40,000/- HAS BEEN SHOWN WHICH IS NOTHING BUT AFTER THOUGHT TO COVER UP THE UNDISCLOSED DEPOSITS OF RS.11,76,457/- . 2. THAT THE LD. CIT (A)-1, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS BY ACCEPTING THE GROSS RECEIPTS RS.18,40,000/- SHOW N IN NEW EVIDENCE IGNORING THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE SHOWED GROSS RECEIP TS OF RS.8,40,000/- AT COLUMN 51(A) OF PAGE 5 OF THE RETURN OF INCOME. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT (A)-1, AGRA HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS BY ACCEPTING ANOTHER SOURCE OF INCOME IN FORM OF CO MMISSION FROM ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 2 TRANSPORT BECAUSE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME ASSESSEE OFFERS ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME I.E. FROM TRANSPORTATION. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES AND PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND THE MATERIAL ON R ECORD. 3. THE FACTS NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ARE THAT I N THIS CASE , THE ASSESSMENT ORDER UNDER APPEAL HAS BEEN PASSED U/S.144 VIDE ORD ER DATED 20.12.2010, DETERMINING THE ASSESSED INCOME AT RS.12,96,457/- A S AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS.1,20,000/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDING, THE AO FOUND THAT THERE WAS A CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.11,76,457/- IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK. THE AO HAS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN A TRANSPORTATION CODE NO.071 2, BUT NO INCOME HAS BEEN SHOWN BY HIM FROM RUNNING OF TRUCKS AND ANY OTHER V EHICLES IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. WITH REGARD TO THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, THE AO HAS TRIED TO COLLECT INFORMATION FROM THE ASSESSEE BY SENDING VA RIOUS NOTICES BUT NO REPLY HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM HIM. HE HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT HE CONTACTED THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE, SHRI ABHISHEK KUMAR GARG, CA BUT HE H AS ALSO INFORMED THAT FROM THE LAST ONE MONTH, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CONTACT HI M AND THEREFORE, HE DID NOT HAVE ANY DOCUMENT RELATING TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, T HE AO HAS FINALLY COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.144 OF THE ACT. IN THE ASSESSM ENT ORDER, THE AO HAS DISCUSSED THAT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK, HAVING ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 3 ACCOUNT NO.027401503816, HE HAS DEPOSITED RS.11,76, 457/- IN CASH AND THERE IS A PAYMENT TO ICICI BANK LTD., HDFC, MANGALAM, CITI FI NANCIAL, INDIABULL AND CENTURIAN ETC. AS PER DETAILS DISCUSSED BY THE AO I N THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THERE ARE DEPOSITS AS WELL AS WITHDRAWALS IN THIS BANK ACCOUN T. HOWEVER, IN ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, HE HAS CONSIDER ED THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT OF RS.11,76,457/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT AND M ADE THE ADDITION FOR THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE AND THUS, THE TOTAL ASSESSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DETERMINE D AT RS.12,96,457/-. 4. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ADDITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE REPRODUCED IN THE A PPELLATE ORDER, IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE DETAILS COULD NOT BE FI LED OF SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF SHIFTING OF THE RESI DENCE. THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORTATION AND FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS.1,20,000/- AND THE SOURCE OF THE CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS OUT OF RECEIPTS FROM TRANSPORTATION BUSINESS. THE CASH DEP OSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT WAS OUT OF REALIZATION OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES DULY RECOR DED IN THE CASH BOOK. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, PLEADED THAT THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCE MAY BE ADMITTED U/R 46A. THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE FORWARDED TO T HE AO FOR FILING OF REMAND REPORT IN WHICH THE AO OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. THE SAME IS REPRODUCED IN THE APPELLATE ORDER. THE LD. CIT(A ) FINDING THAT NO REASONS HAVE ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 4 BEEN EXPLAINED FOR NON-PRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL EVI DENCES BEFORE THE AO, REJECTED THE REQUEST OF ASSESSEE FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES U/R. 46A. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, EXPLAINED THE CASH DEPOSITED I N THE BANK ACCOUNT FROM TRANSPORT BUSINESS. IT WAS ALSO PLEADED THAT THE AO HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME OTHER THAN RUNNING OF TRUCKS/VEHICLES. THEREFORE, THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IS OUT OF TRANSPORT BUSINESS AND ACCORDING TO SECTION 44AE, NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED FOR SUCH BUSINESS. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSID ERING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND GOING THROUGH THE ENTRIES IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, ACCEPTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT BANK DEPOSITS ARE FROM TRANSPO RTATION BUSINESS. THEREFORE, SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION WAS DELETED. HOWEVER, ITS GROS S RECEIPTS WERE ESTIMATED AND BY APPLYING HIGHER PROFIT RATE, PART ADDITION WAS MAIN TAINED. THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA 5.5 AND 5.6 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER A RE REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 5.5 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENT TAKEN BY THE ID . AR IN THIS REGARD. THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, HAS ME NTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) HAS TRANSPORTATION CODE NO.071 2 BUT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, NO DETAILS WERE GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE (A PPELLANT) ABOUT RUNNING OF TRUCKS OR ANY OTHER VEHICLE. IN THE APPE AL PROCEEDING, THE LD. AR HAS CLAIMED ABOUT INCOME OF RS.1,20,000/- SH OWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS BEING ON ACCOUNT OF RUNNING OF TWO TANK ERS WHICH WAS PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) AFTER OBTAINI NG FINANCE. IN SUPPORT OF SHOWING INCOME OF RS.1,20,000/- DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, A PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT HAS BEEN FILED IN W HICH, GROSS RECEIPT HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS.18,40,000/- ON WHICH, A NET PR OFIT OF RS.1,20,000/- HAS BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT). BUT THIS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT WAS NOT FILED AT THE TIME OF FILING OF RETURN. THOUGH THE ID. AR HAS CLAIMED THA T NO BOOKS ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE (APPELLAN T) IN VIEW OF THE ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 5 SECTION 44AE BUT THE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE ( APPELLANT) DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, HAS NOT BEEN CALCULAT ED AS PER SECTION 44AE BECAUSE FULL DETAILS OF THE TRUCKS AND OTHER V EHICLES OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN AND CO MPUTATION OF INCOME AS PER PROVISION OF SECTION 44AE HAS NOT BEE N FURNISHED. AFTER DISCUSSION WITH THE ID. AR AND TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE TOTALITY OF FACTS OF THE CASE, IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT THOUGH THE ASSE SSEE (APPELLANT) IS OWNER OF TWO TANKERS, HE IS ALSO EARNING INCOME BY WAY OF RUNNING OF VEHICLE ON COMMISSION BASIS AND, THEREFORE, A PROFI T & LOSS ACCOUNT HAS BEEN PREPARED TO COMPUTE HIS INCOME INSTEAD OF COMPUTING THE INCOME ON THE BASIS OF SECTION 44AE FOR TWO TANKERS OWNED BY HIM. THEREFORE, IT WOULD NOT BE LOGICAL TO ACCEPT THAT T HE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) IS TO BE CALCULATED AS PER SEC TION 44AE BECAUSE EVEN THE ID. AR, WHILE MAKING SUBMISSION DURING THE APPEAL HAS NOT MADE THE COMPUTATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) AS PER SECTION 44AE. THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FURNISHED B Y THE ID. AR DURING APPEAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE AS NO T ADMISSIBLE AS PER RULE 46A BECAUSE THE SAME WAS NOT FILED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. IT HAS ALSO BEEN FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) IS NOT MAINTAINING COMPLETE SET OF REGU LAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHICH THE ID. AR HIMSELF HAS ADMITTED THAT AS PER SECTION 44AE, HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND EVEN WHILE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSE E (APPELLANT) HAS NOT FILLED UP ALL THE COLUMNS WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE FILLED UP ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED AND INCOME IS DECLARED IN COLUMN NO 51 OF PART A - P&L RELATING TO 'NO ACCOUN T CASE'. THEREFORE, IT IS UNDISPUTEDLY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESS EE (APPELLANT) IS NOT MAINTAINED COMPLETE SET OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 5.6 CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF THE PROFIT O F THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) CANNOT BE WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF TH E PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FILED DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDING. HOWEVER , LOOKING TO THE NATURE OF ENTRIES OF CASH DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS, FOUND IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF THE DEPOSI TS MADE IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT IS UNEXPLAINED BECAUSE AFTER DEPOSIT O F CASH AMOUNTS, THERE ARE WITHDRAWALS AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE (APPEL LANT) IS IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORT, SOURCE OF SUCH DEPOSITS BEIN G FROM HIS TRANSPORT BUSINESS CAN ALSO BE NOT BRUSHED ASIDE. THE TOTAL A MOUNT OF DEPOSIT OF CASH IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN COMPUTED BY THE AO AT ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 6 RS.11,76,457/-. AS AGAINST THIS TOTAL AMOUNT OF CAS H DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, THE ID. AR HAS SHOWN THE GROSS RECEIP TS OF RS.18,40,000/- IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FURNISH ED DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDING. HE HAS ALSO PLEADED DURING THE A PPEAL PROCEEDING THAT DESPITE THE REJECTION OF CASH BOOK OF THE ASSE SSEE (APPELLANT) AS NOT BEING ADMITTED IN VIEW OF RULE 46A, THAT WAS PR ODUCED DURING APPEAL PROCEEDING, THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK AC COUNT MAY BE TREATED AS EXPLAINED OUT OF THE RECEIPTS OF ASSESSE E (APPELLANT) FROM HIS TRANSPORT BUSINESS. SINCE, THE GROSS RECEIPTS SHOWN IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT PRODUCED BY THE LD. AR DURING THE APPE AL PROCEEDING BEING MUCH MORE THAN THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, IT IS ACCEPTED BY ME THAT RS.11,76,457/- DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) IS OUT OF TOTAL GROSS RECE IPTS OF RS.18,40,000/- SHOWN IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, FROM T HE GROSS RECEIPTS OF RS.18,40,000/-, THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) HAS SHO WN A PROFIT OF RS.1,20,000/- WHICH COMES TO BE AT PROFIT RATE OF 6 .5%. AS THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) HAS NOT MAINTAINED THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND HIS INCOME IS ALSO NOT BEING COMPUTED AS PER PR OVISION OF SECTION 44AE FROM THE TWO TANKERS OWNED BY HIM BECAUSE HE W AS RUNNING OTHER VEHICLES ALSO ON COMMISSION BASIS, WHICH WERE NOT OWNED BY HIM, HIS INCOME IS TO BE ESTIMATED BASED ON THE INF ORMATION AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE INFORMAT ION PROVIDED DURING THE APPEAL. AS PER THE INFORMATION DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE APPELLANT, HE HAS SHOWN TOTAL G ROSS RECEIPTS AT RS.8,40,000/- AND AFTER DEDUCTION EXPENSES OF RS.7, 20,000/-, HE HAS SHOWN A NET PROFIT OF RS.1,20,000/-. THIS INFORMATI ON DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME GIVES THE AVERAGE RATE OF EARNING OF COMMISSION INCOME BY THE ASSESSEE FROM TRANSPORT BUSINESS AT 1 4.28%. AFTER CONSIDERING THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCO UNTS AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF GROSS RECEIPTS DISCLOSED DURING THE APPEA L PROCEEDING AT RS.18,40,000/- IN THE P & L ACCOUNT FILED BY THE LD . AR, IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) HAS SUPPRESSED THE AMOUNT OF GROSS RECEIPTS DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. D ESPITE SHOWING THE CORRECT AMOUNT OF GROSS RECEIPTS AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHILE PREPARING THE P & L ACCOUNT FILED DURING THE APPEAL, THE LD. AR HAS SHOWN THE SAME AM OUNT OF INCOME AS IT WAS DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AT RS.1, 20,000/- AND THUS, NOW IN THE DETAILS FILED DURING APPEAL, THE AVERAGE RATE OF EARNING OF COMMISSION HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED SHOWING IT AT 6.5% I NSTEAD OF 14.28% DECLARED IN THE RETURN. AS THIS P & L ACCOUN T WAS NOT FILED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, IT HAS ALREADY BE EN REJECTED FOR ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 7 ADMISSION AS PER RULE 46A(1). HOWEVER, SINCE THE GR OSS RECEIPTS DECLARED IN THIS P & L ACCOUNT HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE A REASONABLE AMOUNT WITH WHICH, THE CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BA NK ACCOUNT CAN BE EXPLAINED, I HAVE TAKEN GROSS RECEIPTS OF THE AS SESSEE AT RS.18,40,000/- FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTIMATION OF HIS INCOME. THE AVERAGE RATE OF EARNING OF COMMISSION IS TAKEN AT 1 4.28% AS DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THEREFORE, I HOLD THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ( APPELLANT) SHOULD BE COMPUTED @ 14.28% OF RS.18,40,000/- WHICH COMES TO RS.2,62,752/- AND HENCE, INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) SHOUL D BE ASSESSED AT RS.2,62,752/- INSTEAD OF RS.1,20,000/- SHOWN BY HIM AND ACCORDINGLY, AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,42,752/- SHALL BE ADDED IN HIS IN COME INSTEAD OF RS.11,76,457/- ADDED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE (APPELLANT) GETS A RELIEF OF RS.10,33, 705/- AND ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO. 3 & 4 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 5. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE ADMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT CHALLENGE PART ADDITION MAINTAINED BY THE LD. C IT(A) ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATION OF INCOME BY APPLYING HIGHER PROFIT RATE. THE LD. D R SUBMITTED THAT DESPITE THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ACCEPT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, HE HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT ANY REASONS. HE HAS, HOWEVER, STAT ED THAT THERE ARE DEPOSITS AS WELL AS WITHDRAWALS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT IN QUESTION . ON GOING THROUGH THE FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(A) AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS CLEAR T HAT THE LD. CIT(A) CORRECTLY FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS OWNER OF TWO TANKERS. COPIES O F REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES ARE FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK AND THE ASSESSEE IS EARNING INCOME BY WAY OF RUNNING OF VEHICLES ON COMMISSION BASIS. THE LD. CIT(A) ON LOO KING TO THE NATURE OF ENTRIES OF ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 8 CASH DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS FOUND IN THE BANK ACC OUNT OF THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED WITH ICICI BANK HELD THAT THE ENTIRE AMO UNT OF DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE UNEXPLAINED BECAU SE AFTER DEPOSIT OF THE CASH AMOUNTS, THERE ARE WITHDRAWALS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORTATION, THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE COU LD NOT BE REFUSED THAT SUCH DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN MADE OUT OF TRANSPORT BUSINESS I NCOME. THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TAKEN THE GROSS R ECEIPTS OF RS.18,40,000/- WHICH ARE MORE THAN THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT . THE ASSESSEE IN THE INCOME STATEMENT (PB-6) FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME SP ECIFICALLY MENTIONED EARNING OF RS.1,20,000/- BEING INCOME FROM TRANSPORTATION BUSI NESS AND AT THE END OF THE PAGE, TOTAL RECEIPTS ARE MENTIONED AT RS. 8,40,000/ -, EXPENSES RS.7,20,000/- AND NET PROFIT RS.1,20,000/-. IT WOULD, THEREFORE, GIVE THE DETAIL THAT THE TOTAL RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE IN A SUM OF RS.16,80,000/-. THE LD. C IT(A) TAKEN THE GROSS RECEIPTS MORE THAN DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME AND EVEN THE AO HAS ADMITTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT THERE ARE DEP OSITS AS WELL AS WITHDRAWALS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT COULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. THE CA SH DEPOSIT WAS, THEREFORE, CORRECTLY FOUND TO BE EXPLAINED OUT OF RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE FROM TRANSPORT BUSINESS. OTHER FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) ESTIMATIN G INCOME BY APPLYING HIGHER PROFIT RATE IS NOT UNDER CHALLENGE BEFORE US IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL AND EVEN ITA NO. 273/AGRA/2013 9 THERE IS NO CROSS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE MAY FURTHER NOTE THAT ON BOTH THE MAIN GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE DEPARTMENT FELT AGGRIEV ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN REDUCING THE ADDITION BY ADMITTING THE NE W EVIDENCE, WHICH ITSELF IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ADMIT ANY NEW EVIDENCE. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF PASSING THE APPELLATE ORDER. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO THING ILLEGALITY IN HIS ORDER IN REDUCING THE ADDITION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSS ION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DI SMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY