TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 113
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tset, it is noted that there is delay in filing the present appeal. After considering the arguments of both sides and considering the affidavits placed on record, we find that the assessee has a reasonable cause and there was no mala fide, the delay so happened in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee filed his return of income showing income of Rs. 2,44,150/- u/s. 44AF of the Act. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny and the AO passed the best assessment u/s. 144 read with 143(3) and made an addition of Rs. 60,23,050/- on account of cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. 4. Being aggrieved, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....year 2007-08 and a cash flow statement. However, the appellant has not filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2008-09 relevant to the Previous Year 2007-08, claiming that he had little business and no taxable income. That he retained a cash balance in hand on Rs. 24,33,000/- therefore contradicts his other submissions. Thus the credibility of the cash in hand of Rs. 24,33,000/- cannot be said to have been established. As regards the Previous Year relevant to the AY of the impugned order, the Ld. AO has not produced any evidence to establish that the cash withdrawn from the bank accounts during the previous year 2008-09 was spent/used for any other purpose; further I have examined the cash flow statement for FY 2008-09 and there are only tw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the books of account and has filed his return of income u/s. 44AF of the Act. It was submitted that even for non-maintenance of books of account, the penalty proceedings u/s. 271A were initiated by the AO which has since been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order dated 30.11.2018 wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has recorded his finding stating that the assessee's case is covered u/s. 44AF(1) of the Act and therefore, the provisions of Section 44AA and 44AB are not applicable to the assessee and the penalty proceedings were quashed. It was submitted, that the said order has been passed by the same Ld. CIT(A) who has passed the impugned order and therefore, as far as the findings of non-maintenance of books of account, the same cannot be sus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lance of Rs. 31,38,050/- and the addition to that extent has been sustained and the remaining addition of Rs. 28,85,000/- has been directed to be deleted. However, while doing so, cash flow statement for the previous financial year 2007-08 and availability of opening cash in hand of Rs. 24,33,000/- at the beginning of current financial year 2008-09 has not been considered. We find that there is no justifiable basis in not considering the cash flow statement for the previous financial year 2007-08 where cash flow statement for the current financial year has been considered by the Ld. CIT(A). As submitted by the Ld. AR, the withdrawals and deposits are supported by the assessee's bank account statements which are available on record. Ther....