Court No. - 35 Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 137 of 2016 Appellant :- Abdullah Tahir Respondent :- Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -2 Counsel for Appellant :- Manjari Singh,Kunal Ravi Singh Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,Manish Goyal Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J. Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J. This appeal has been filed by assessee under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act), against order dated 30.9.2015 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in I.T.A. No. 134/Alld/2012. It has been admitted on following question of law:- "(II) Whether undisclosed income alleged by Revenue which has been properly explained by appellant was liable to be added in income of assessee under Section 68 and 69 of Act or not?" assessee engaged in business of trading in sarees. For Assessment Year 2007-08 he filed return disclosing income Rs. 87,790/-. return was revised on 6.1.2009 disclosing income Rs. 1,49,030. Subsequently, assessment order dated 31.10.2010 was passed under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of Act. In that assessment order assessing authority made additions to income of assessee on account of undisclosed cash credits and undisclosed investments made by assessee. Assessing Officer assesed assesee's income at Rs. 19,71,720/-. He added to income of assessee (i) Rs. 7,91,621/- on basis of peak credits in bank account held by assesee with Axis Bank; (ii) another amount of Rs. 5,66,782/- on basis of peak credits in another bank account held by assessee with HDFC bank; (iii) amount of Rs. 78,714/- on basis of peak credits in another bank account held by assessee with HDFC bank and (iv) Rs. 5,206/- on basis of peak credits in bank account held by assessee with Vyasa Bank. Admittedly, all these bank accounts were not disclosed by assessee in its regular books of accounts. CIT deleted this addition on reasoning that deposit in aforesaid bank accounts came to be made from sale proceeds of assessee. However, upon appeal to Tribunal, at instance of revenue, it has set aside order of CIT (Appeals) and restored assessment order. Tribunal has observed that there is no evidence or material to establish that assessee had deposited its disclosed sale proceeds in its undisclosed bank accounts. Tribunal has further reasoned, if it was case of assessee that those deposits had been made out of duly accounted for sale receipts, assessee should have discharged its burden by adducing necessary evidence that would have been in his possession. In absence of any evidence, to support of finding recorded by CIT (Appeals), Tribunal has reversed order of CIT (Appeals) and confirmed assessment order on further finding that addition made was wholly reasonable being based on peak credits found existing in assessee's undisclosed bank accounts. Learned counsel for assessee submits that entries found in aforesaid bank accounts of assessee were duly explained and therefore addition is wholly unwarranted. Having considered argument so advanced, we find there is no evidence shown to exist on record to support submission made by learned counsel for assessee inasmuch as non- disclosure of bank accounts in question in books of accounts of assessee prima facie, leads to inference that such bank accounts reflected deposit of un-accounted business income. It was for assessee to lead evidence and prove otherwise i.e. bank accounts carried/reflected it's duly accounted for business income. However, assessee did not adduce any evidence to establish that deposits made in those bank accounts had been drawn from sale proceeds of its business as were recorded in regular books of accounts in assessee. By very nature explanation required in such situation had to be specific such as to co-relate deposits made including amounts and dates on which such deposit were made with corresponding entries of cash receipt/balance in books of accounts of assessee. burden was squarely on assessee and it could have been discharged by assessee with reference to specific evidence. Inasmuch as it does not appear that assessee led any evidence on that count, argument advanced by learned counsel for assessee that such deposits were necessarily part of sale proceeds of assessee's business duly reflected in regular books of account of assessee cannot be accepted. finding recorded by Tribunal are therefore, findings of fact recorded on basis of due appraisal of evidence. Neither such findings are perverse nor otherwise illegal or wrong. questions of law raised in this appeal are answered against assessee and in favour of revenue. appeal lacks merit and is dismissed. No order as to costs. Order Date :- 29.11.2017 Mini Abdullah Tahir v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -2