AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072334119(1), dated 20.01.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
2 For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 303 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive ground raised herein, we notice that he seeks to reverse both the learned lower authorities’ respective findings assessing 8% of the entire cash deposits of Rs.7,77,68,987/-, amounting to Rs.62,21,519/-, as unexplained; in assessment order dated 30.12.2017, as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
Both the learned representatives vehemently reiterate their respective stands in support and against the impugned cash deposit addition. There does not seem to be much a dispute between the parties that this assessee/individual is engaged in the business of trading of mobile recharge, trading of cell-phones. He has further declared GP rate of 1.19% on sale of mobile sets.
That being the case, it could safely be presumed that although the assessee could not reconcile and verify his impugned cash deposits forming part of sales of mobile phones to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, the same could be termed as the sole reason for rejecting his entire explanation as well. We thus deem it appropriate in this factual backdrop that a further lumpsum addition @ 2.5% of the entire cash deposits of Rs.7,77,68,987/-(inclusive of his GP already declared in the assessee’s hands) would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.
No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.