2023 (1) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n that the assessee's business is cash basis. It was the submission that the assessee during the period of demonetization has deposited Rs.26,50,000/- in his bank account. It was the submission that the AO had called for the details from the assessee and examined the same and passed an order u/s.143(3) of the Act on 26.12.2019, wherein the opening cash balance of Rs.16,69,474/- had been examined and the gross income received by the assessee till 08.11.2016 to an extent of Rs.12,34,470/- had also been examined. The AO after examination of all these details had accepted the return filed by the assessee. It was the submission that the ld. Pr.CIT-1 had invoked his powers u/s.263 of the Act to hold that the AO had neither called for the cash boo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t order. Nothing adverse was found by the AO. In view of the above facts there is no unexplained income which has not been verified by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings and neither the AO has passed any erroneous order which is pre-judicial to the interest of revenue. 3. It was also submitted by the ld. AR that the AO in the course of original assessment had examined the opening cash balance and he has also mentioned in his assessment order. It was the submission that the amount of opening cash balance of Rs.16,69,474/ is an undisputed amount. It was further submitted that the AO has also examined the gross income received by the assessee till 08.11.2016 at Rs.12,34,470/- as per the cash flow statement submitted by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....IT-DR admitted that the return of the assessee has been filed u/s.44AD of the Act and no cash book has been submitted. It was the submission that the amount of Rs.9 lakhs, which has been proposed by the ld. Pr.CIT is the minimum liable to be brought to tax, which the AO has failed to consider. It was the submission that the order of the ld. Pr.CIT is liable to be upheld. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. Pr.CIT shows that in para 3 of his order he mentions that the assessee has deposited Rs.26,50,000/- in cash during the demonetization period. In para 3 paragraph further the ld. Pr.CIT goes on to hold that the source of the cash deposits as explained by the assessee was without any details and n....