2023 (3) TMI 213

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he precise section under which the above addition is covered. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred both in law and in facts of the case in upholding the addition of Rs. 7,00,000/- ignoring the facts that the appellant has also duly explained the source of cash deposit during demonetization and no contrary finding has been made to evidences submitted by the appellant. Ground No. 1 3. The learned assessee representative (AR) submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has reduce the addition made by the AO to Rs. 7 lakh u/s. 115BBE of the Act, on the ground that the cash has been deposited out of unexplained sources. The Ld. AR submitted that the section 115BBE is not a charging section but this section simply provides mechanism for levying of tax in a case the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....closing credit balances appearing as on 31.03.2012 could be added. Therefore, non-mentioning the precise provision of law makes the impugned addition bad in law. Ground No. 2 7. The Ld. AR submitted that there was sufficient rental income, tuition fee income and bank withdrawals totalling to Rs. 12,68,680/- in the hands of assessee. The Ld. AR further explained that out of said cash the assessee has deposited Rs. 12,10,000/- during demonetization and pre-demonetization period leaving closing balance as on 25.11.2016 of Rs. 58,680/-. The Ld. AR submitted that the opening cash was Rs. 2,74,580/- as on 01.04.2016 and after including rent and tuition fee receipt up to demonetization period and bank withdrawals up to demonetization period the ....