Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

peak credit and mentioned at pages 7 to 10 of the assessment order and the total of the same comes to Rs.43,67,62,555/- which was treated as unexplained credit and addition was made to the income of the assessee.
4. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT (A) as well as challenged the reopening of the assessment in the matter. The submissions of the assessee are reproduced in the appellate order in which the assessee explained that the ITAT had decided the case of the assessee for earlier assessment years i.e. 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04, wherein the assessee has been granted the benefit of calculation of peak balance and telescoping thereof in the manner discussed above. Keeping the said decision in view, the addition, if any, at all has to be limited to the peak credit of Rs.1,82,59,348/- as on 10.04.2004 as telescope for the maximum peak balance of earlier years i.e. Rs.46,16,837/- for AY 2003- ITA.No.893/Del./2015 & ITA.No.5214/Del./2016 M/s. R.L. Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
5. The Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the reopening of the assessment and dismissed this ground of appeal of the ITA.No.893/Del./2015 & ITA.No.5214/Del./2016 M/s. R.L. Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.
assessee. The Ld.CIT (A) as regards the working of the peak credit noted that the Tribunal has decided the issue in earlier year and have considered the method of working of the peak credit submitted by the assessee to the AO during assessment proceedings. The working of the peak credit, telescoping and set off all the entries and set off of the opening balances have been accepted. The Ld. CIT (A) forwarded the copy of the peak credit working submitted by the assessee to AO for filing a remand report. The AO filed the remand report in which the AO explained the peak credit is worked out on similar lines as was considered in earlier years AY 2002-03 and 2003-04. However, examination of the working of peak balances showed that assessee while working out the peak balances had also debited the expenses incurred. This method is incorrect for working peak balance. The AO, therefore, reported that the peak after excluding the debits on account of expenses for assessment year under appeal would come to Rs.5,10,51,972/- as against claim of ITA.No.893/Del./2015 & ITA.No.5214/Del./2016 M/s. R.L. Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

6.23. The peak credit theory and the benefit of telescoping is generally accepted as it is logical and acceptable provided there is reasonable material to show that withdrawals or repayments could have been available on the date of subsequent credit or repayment, more so, in the accounts of different persons. The fact that assessee has been held to be a fund manager for 148 persons for which the moneys are frequently withdrawn or deposited as per these case laws and facts and circumstances of this case assessee will be entitled to work out a peak credit and avail the benefits of telescoping. We may hasten to add ITA.No.893/Del./2015 & ITA.No.5214/Del./2016 M/s. R.L. Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

course thereof he requests for necessary working of peak credit, correction of mistakes, contra entries and considering the claims of available opening balances. The claim of opening balances is made as the data recovered pertains to three years and assessees fund managing activities span to three years. Despite assessees diligence in filing all the details the authorities below fail to consider the assessee's objections and workings. In our considered view the facts and circumstances of the case and departmental theory warrant application of peak theory, telescoping, correction of mistakes and taking cognizance of journal/contra entries. In our view ratio of decisions in the cases of - Anantharam Veerasinghaiah & Co. (supra); K.S.M. Guruswamy Nadar & Sons (supra); Singhal Industrial Corpn. (supra); Kantilal & Bros. (supra); Sanjay Kumar Jain (supra); & Ishwardass Mutha (supra), support the assessee's case for peak credit and telescoping benefits.