Shri Jayesh Babubhai Bharatiya, Surat V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-7(3), Surat

ITA 392/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1630 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 05-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P CHAUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: M K PATEL
• Keywords: Peak credit

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.392/AHD/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ) SHRI JAYESH BABUBHAI BHARATIYA 64, KALIDASNAGAR SOCIETY AT GANESHPURA PO CHHAPRABHATHA TAL. CHORYASI, SURAT-395 003 / VS. THE ITO WARD-7(3) SURAT ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. AICPB 4425 A ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K. PATEL, AR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI O.P. CHAUDHARY, DR / DATE OF HEARING 05/05/2016 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 10/05/2016 / O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-V, SUR AT DATED 03/10/2011 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 BY RAISING FOLLOWING SOLITARY GROUND:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS LAW ON THE SUBJECT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF THE INC OME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING ITA NO. 392/AHD/201 2 SHRI JAYESH BABUBHAI BHARATIYA VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - OFFICER IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.2,18,158/- AS ALLE GED UNEXPLAINED DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT ON PEAK BALANCE . 2. FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED CASH ON VARIOUS DATES, A GGREGATING TO AN AMOUNT OF RS.10,74,250/- DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION. THE AO AFTER REJECTING THE CONTENTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE OBSERVED THAT THE AFORESAID CASH RECEIPTS HAVE GOT RELEVANCE WITH HIS COMMISSION INCOME AND EXPENDITURE OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE AO ADD ED THIS PEAK AMOUNT OF RS.2,18,158/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSE E ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED/UNDISCLOSED INCOME, WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE LD.CIT(A). 3. THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN THAT THE LD.C IT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO BY MAK ING A SUM OF RS.2,18,158/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED AND UNEXPLAINED BANK DEPOSIT OF PEAK BALANCE. THE MAIN ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WA S THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN VARIOUS DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE PEAK B ALANCE AND THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. LOOKING TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE NOT INCLINED WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A). WE FIND THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY COGENT EVIDENCE WITH REGARD TO THE DEPOSI TS MADE IN THE BANK. ITA NO. 392/AHD/201 2 SHRI JAYESH BABUBHAI BHARATIYA VS. ITO ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - THE AO IS FAIR ENOUGH TO MAKE THE ADDITION BY ADDIN G PEAK BALANCE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT BECAUSE, IN SUCH A CASE, SUCH SOU RCE OF PEAK BALANCE METHOD IS PROPER TO COMPUTE THE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE. THUS, ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS UPHELD AND THE GROUND OF ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10 MAY, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) JU DICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 10 / 05 /2016 &.., .(../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#$#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , ( ) / THE CIT(A)-V, SURAT 5. /01 ((*+ , *+# , ) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 145 6 / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / ( //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD