Tribunal confirms CIT(A) decisions for assessee, deletes additions on cash deposits, capital gains, car sale. No further inquiries needed.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decisions in favor of the assessee on all issues. The additions of cash deposits during demonetization, long term capital gains, and profit from the sale of a car were deleted as they were explained or accounted for in the books of accounts. The Tribunal also ruled that no further inquiries were necessary regarding additional information filed by the assessee and dismissed the revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objections.

---

---

Issues:
1. Addition of cash deposits made during demonetization period.
2. Addition of long term capital gains.
3. Addition of profit from sale of car.
4. Contention regarding additional information filed by the assessee.
5. Cross objections filed by the assessee.

Issue 1: Cash Deposits during Demonetization Period
- The appeal was filed by the revenue against the CIT(A)'s order regarding the addition of cash deposits made during demonetization.
- The AO added Rs. 42,00,000 under section 69A as the source of the cash deposits was not explained by the assessee.
- CIT(A) found that the cash deposits were explained from the entries in the books of accounts, following a decision by ITAT Mumbai, and deleted the addition.
- The department appealed before the Tribunal, arguing that the addition deletion was unjustified, but the Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s order as the deposits were duly explained from the books of accounts.

Issue 2: Long Term Capital Gains
- AO added Rs. 77,74,373 as long term capital gains, which was deleted by CIT(A) as the AO erroneously invoked section 69A.
- Tribunal found that the assessee had furnished details and claimed exemption under section 10(38) for the sale of shares, which was recorded in the books of accounts, hence no addition was warranted under section 69A.

Issue 3: Profit from Sale of Car
- AO added Rs. 1,67,983 as profit from the sale of a car under section 69A, which was deleted by CIT(A) as the sale proceeds were correctly adjusted in the depreciation statement.
- Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s decision as the sale consideration of the car was reduced from the block of assets, and no separate addition was required.

Issue 4: Additional Information
- Department contended that additional information was filed by the assessee, arguing for remitting the matter back to the AO.
- Tribunal held that CIT(A) is empowered to make further inquiries, and since the information provided was verified, there was no need to remit the matter back to the AO.

Issue 5: Cross Objections
- Assessee filed cross objections supporting CIT(A)'s order, which became infructuous as the appeal of the revenue was dismissed.
- Therefore, the cross objections were also dismissed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and the cross objections of the assessee, upholding the decisions made by the CIT(A) in all issues discussed.

---