RAVINDER KUMAR Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant who has been unsuccessful before all the Income Tax Authorities has now filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as "the Act") against the order dated 02.09.2019 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for the assessment year (AY) 2010-11 in ITA No. 196/Del/2019 whereby the ITAT has sustained the additions made by the CIT (A).

(2.) The present case originates with the Assessing Officer (AO) receiving information for non-filing of ITR for AY 2010-11 through NMS Cycle. On perusal of ITS data, it came to the notice of the AO that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 15,86,000/- in his bank account with Khatri Co-OP (U) Bank Ltd., during the period of 01.04.2009 to 31.03.2010. The case was re- opened under Section 147 of the Act and notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2017 was issued. Thereafter, notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act dated 11.10.2017 was issued and the proceedings before the AO were fixed for 17.10.2017. The appellant failed to attend the same and as a result, a fresh notice dated 29.11.2017 under Section 142 (1) of the Act along with show cause was issued, fixing the next date for proceeding for 07.12.2017.

(3.) In the appeal proceedings before the CIT (A), the appellant urged that the AO had not provided time to submit the required documents and has not considered the return filed and the declaration accompanying the same. The appellant-assessee contended that he had made sale of Rs. 15,86,000/- and computed his income under Section 44AD of the Act @ 8% as Rs. 1,26,999/- and as a result, he was not liable to file income tax return for the relevant year but when the notice under Section 148 of the Act was received, he filed the same, declaring his income as Rs. 1,26,999/-. The CIT(A) held that the averments made by the appellant were not substantiated and it was a case where cash had been deposited merely to generate funds in the bank account, whenever payments were required to be made by cheque. No evidence of Kirana business had been presented and no books of account had been produced. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO was confirmed.