Satish Kumar Madanlal Gupta Near Janata Garage Vs ITO (ITAT Nagpur)
ITAT Nagpur held that once the computation of income is approved by the assessee before CIT(A) the same cannot be argued against the Tribunal. Accordingly, computation of income directed by CIT(A) upheld.
Facts- The assessee is an individual. During the relevant A.Y., as per AIR information, the assessee was found to have deposited cash of Rs. 5,28,35,502 in his bank account with Bank of Baroda, Gondia. Since the assessee had substantial cash deposits in his bank account and on the other hand had not filed the return of income for the year under consideration, AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
AO made addition of Rs. 5,28,35,502, to the total income of the assessee by passing order u/s. 144 r/w section 147 of the Act. CIT(A) directed to re-compute taxable income of assessee by upholding addition of Rs. 51,58,766/-.
Conclusion- Held that the learned CIT(A) has passed a detailed and meticulous order and has strenuously arrived at the computation of the income after getting inputs from the assessee, cross–verification from the suppliers, verification by the Assessing Officer, the findings are of–course based on a certain assumption and estimate, which cannot be faulted with because the assessee has not been frank enough its true state–of–affairs. Once the assessee has himself conceded before the learned CIT(A) about the computation of income, he simply cannot turn around and argue against the same before us.
