2022 (7) TMI 1012

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....everal years. Since her income is below the tax limit prescribed under section 139 of the I.T. Act, 1961, she has stated to have not filed the return of income. During the demonetization period i.e., from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 relevant to the impugned assessment year under consideration, the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.12,29,500/- in Corporation Bank and Federal Bank bearing A/c.No.xxxx8000 and xxxxx7514. Therefore, the A.O. issued notice under section 142(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 10.03.2018 through electronically and manually asking the assessee to file her return of income for the impugned assessment year on or before 31.03.2018. There were no compliance from the side of the assessee. Thereafter, the A.O. received direction....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under section 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961. Thus, the A.O. assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.3,55,000/-. 2.2. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O. the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 01.11.2021 in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2021-22/1036688014(1) confirmed the order of the A.O. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds : "1. That the honorable CIT(A)NFAC has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs.3,55,000.00 on illegal and untenable grounds. Hence, the addition as such may be deleted. 2. That the Ld AO has erred in law and on facts in making assessmen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 21.02.2017 which was SOP for verification of cash deposits. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee with respect to gifted amount of Rs.1,75,000/- from Sh Rakesh Jain submitted that he is the real brother of the assessee and he gifted the amount to meet the medical expenses of her husband. Ld. A.R. submitted that Sh. Rakesh Jain is working as Sales Executive and her wife was giving tuitions upto 10th class besides his father was having rental income of Rs.13,500/- per month and the average bank balance of Sh Rakesh Jain throughout the year is Rs.1,50,000/-. Further, in support of his contention, the Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied on the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Mehta Parikh & Co. vs., CIT 1956 AIR 5....