Tribunal allows appeal, sets aside unexplained cash credit, remands for fresh consideration.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order that confirmed the addition of Rs. 11,00,000 as unexplained cash credit by the AO. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation that the cash advances were received by the wife against the sale of her property and deposited in a joint account, supported by documentary evidence. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh consideration, with the Tribunal excluding lockdown days in the order pronouncement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, following a Mumbai Tribunal decision.

---

---

Issues involved: Addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 11,00,000 made by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) based on deposits in the bank account of the assessee.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Facts: The assessee, an individual engaged in retail trading, filed a return of income declaring Rs. 97,250. The AO observed claimed advances of Rs. 7,00,000 and Rs. 4,00,000 from two parties, which were treated as unexplained cash credit, leading to an addition of Rs. 11,00,000 to the total income.

2. AO's Decision and CIT(A) Confirmation: The AO treated the advances as unexplained as the parties denied providing any such advances to the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, noting that the deals were made by the assessee's wife, not the assessee, and lacked evidence of the assessee's right to receive the cash advances.

3. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal heard arguments and reviewed the material. The assessee's counsel contended that the advances were received by the wife against the sale of her property, deposited in a joint account. The Tribunal accepted this argument, noting documentary evidence supporting the claim and directed the matter back to the AO for verification.

4. Judicial Precedent and Conclusion: The Tribunal excluded lockdown days in the pronouncement of the order due to the COVID-19 pandemic, following a Mumbai Tribunal decision. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanding the matter to the AO for fresh consideration.

This detailed analysis highlights the progression of the case from the AO's decision to the Tribunal's final ruling, emphasizing the key arguments, findings, and legal precedents invoked during the proceedings.

---