TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>AO ignored VAT collections and TCS deductions evidence while making unexplained cash deposit additions under section 139(1)</h1> <h3>ACIT, CC-1, Ranchi Versus M/s Koira Ores Pvt. Ltd.</h3> ACIT, CC-1, Ranchi Versus M/s Koira Ores Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved: 1. Deletion of addition on account of unexplained cash deposits.2. Deletion of addition based on Form 26AS.3. Deletion of addition on account of estimated income for non-filing of return.Summary:1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Unexplained Cash Deposits:The revenue challenged the deletion of an addition of Rs. 1,52,58,698/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) due to unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts. The AO had treated the amount as unexplained cash credit under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act because the assessee did not file a return of income or respond to notices. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] deleted the addition after considering the assessee's submission that the cash deposits represented sale proceeds of crushed iron ore lumps. The CIT(A) noted that the AO failed to scrutinize the documents properly and did not doubt the audited books of accounts during the remand proceedings.2. Deletion of Addition Based on Form 26AS:The revenue also contested the deletion of an addition of Rs. 2,30,97,280/- based on Form 26AS, which the AO had treated as undisclosed business income. The CIT(A) observed that the AO misunderstood the content of Form 26AS, which included both Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) and Tax Collected at Source (TCS). The CIT(A) found that the amount represented purchases of iron ore lumps from various parties and interest income from fixed deposits, which were duly accounted for in the books of accounts. The CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the addition, noting that the AO committed a grave error by treating TCS as TDS.3. Deletion of Addition on Account of Estimated Income for Non-Filing of Return:The revenue further disputed the deletion of an estimated addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made by the AO due to the assessee's non-filing of return. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee's books of accounts were audited under Section 44AB, but the return could not be filed due to heavy losses and recovery proceedings initiated by the bank, which led to the vacation of premises. The CIT(A) found that the AO did not point out any defects in the books of accounts during the remand proceedings and directed the deletion of the estimated addition.Conclusion:The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) upheld the order of the CIT(A), dismissing the revenue's appeal. The ITAT agreed with the CIT(A)'s findings that the cash deposits were from the sale proceeds of iron ore lumps, the addition based on Form 26AS was erroneous, and the estimated addition was unjustified. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed, and the order was pronounced in the open court on 6th November 2023.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
