2023 (3) TMI 409

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the first Appellate Order without allowing the appellant sufficient opportunity of being heard which is arbitrary, unjustified and bad in law and is therefore is null and void-ab-initio and the order deserves to be quashed. 2. That, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (Ld/- CIT(A)) on erred in the facts and circumstances of the case, in confirming the assessment of total income of the at Rs. 22,99,530 against the total income returned of Rs. 8,70,530/- arbitrarily. The Ld/- AO made additions of Rs. 14,29,000/- by invoking section 69A, to the returned income of Appellant without appreciating the fact that Appellant had sufficient cash savings which arbitrary, unjustified, bad in law and have not been considered judicia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of Rs. 899/- u/s 234C of the income Tax Act, 1961 which is uncalled for, unlawful, unjustified, arbitrary and deserves to be deleted. 7. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another. 8. The appellant craves the right to add, amend, alter, withdraw or forgo any ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing." 2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that in this case the assessee filed its return of income on 27.8.2017 declaring income of Rs. 8,70,530/-. The case was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the "Act". Thereafter, the case was taken up for limited scrutiny under CASS for depositing cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Offic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... made in the bank account. 6. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. One of the submissions of the assessee is that the authorities below failed to appreciate the facts in right perspective. It is contended that assessee had deposited cash in form of demonetized currency notes which were no longer legal tenders as on 16.11.2016, into his savings bank account. It is contended that depositing money in bank account is one form of investment on which the assessee was earning interest. Since the Assessing Officer was dis-satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee, the addition could have been made u/s 69 only and not u/s 69A of the Act. It is contended that making addition in a wrong provision....