Income Tax

Cash deposits in bank can be explained as out of gross receipts u/s 44AD from contract business

Cash deposits in bank can be explained as out of gross receipts u/s 44AD from contract business. ITAT deleted addition made on the basis of peak cash credit

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2818 (2019) (03) ITAT

The assessee had challenged the order of the CIT (Appeals) in confirming addition on the basis of peak credit for cash deposits in bank.

The assessee was an individual engaged in civil contract work. For the relevant AY he filed return of income declaring total income @ 8% on gross receipts from both government and private contract works.

The Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee had made deposits in his bank account in cash. When asked to explain the source of cash deposits in the bank account, the assessee attributed the same to the contract receipts which were deposited and withdrawn as per the requirements.

The AO, however, refused to accept the explanation of the assessee and he held that only income from executing the contract works can be explained as source and not the gross contract receipts.

The AO, thereafter, proceeded to work out the peak cash credit and made an addition to the income returned by the assessee.

On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(Appeals) confirmed the order of AO.

The Tribunal opined that though the assessee had not filed the cash flow statement regarding receipts from execution of contracts and outflow of cash, yet the fact remained that the assessee had huge receipts from execution of contracts and the sum deposited in the bank account can be explained as receipts from the contract business.

The Tribunal opined that the AO and the CIT(Appeals) were not justified in giving credits only for the profits earned from contract business at 8% of the receipts from contracts.

Accordingly the Tribunal deleted the addition made by the AO and allowed the appeal of the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

2 days ago
  • Insurance

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price

CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…

4 days ago
  • GST

Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities

Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

No protective addition required when additions is confirmed in hands of searched person – ITAT

No protective addition required in the hand of a third party when additions have been confirmed in the hands of…

5 days ago
  • arbitration

Limitation u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commences on disposal of application u/s 33 by Arbitral Tribunal – SC

Limitation for filing application u/s 34 of Arbitration Act commence from date on which application u/s 33 is disposed of…

1 week ago