TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 422
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs, passed by the CIT(A)-1 & 2, Rajkot, for assessment years 2006-07, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2006-07 & 2008-09. All these appeals were heard together and, therefore, as a matter of convenience, all these six appeals are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order. 2. First we take up the appeal filed by the Revenue for the Assessment Year 2006-07 i.e. ITA No.23/RJT/2016 and the grounds raised in this appeal are reproduced as under :- "(1) The learned CIT(A), has erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of Rs.10,05,23,637/- made u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 not appreciating the facts that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to comply with all the terms of notices issued under sub-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence or explanation regarding source of these cash deposits and, therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.10,05,23,637/- under Section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash credit. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee did not file any evidences or any submissions before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings. The cash deposit of Rs.10,05,23,637/- were deposited in ICICI Bank Limited account on different dates. There was no explanation offered by the assessee during the assessment proceedings and order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act was passed. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has assumed the business of the assessee as shroffs business and from the various documents and evidences presented before us the assessee could not establish that the investment in respect of cash was related to the business of the assessee. The assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer and has not filed any details. The Ld. AR at the time of hearing filed application under Rule 27 thereby supporting the order of the CIT(A) but the CIT(A) has not given detailed finding as to why the said unexplained cash credit should be taken into account when the evidences before the Assessing Officer as well as before the C....