TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 976
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') relating to the Assessment Year (A.Y) 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Partnership Firm engaged in the business of dealership of two wheeler of Hero MotoCorp Ltd. and also in sales of parts and authorized service station. For the Assessment Year 2017-18, the assessee filed its Return of Income declaring total income of Rs. 13,97,820/- on 13.10.2017. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) and then taken up for scrutiny assessment as large value of cash deposit made by the assessee during demonetization period. The Assessing Officer issued various notices u/s. 143(2) calling for explanations, details and having satisfied with the explanations offered by the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....00 ICICI BANK 11/11/2016 16,92,130.00 16,92,130.00 ICICI BANK 12/11/2016 39,03,000.00 39,03,000.00 ICICI BANK TOTAL (A) 2,11,95,130.00 2,11,95,130.00 11/11/2016 50,00,000.00 50,00,000.00 RNSB BANK TOTAL (B) 50,00,000.00 50,00,000.00 GRAND TOTAL (A+B) 2,61,95,130.00 2,61,95,130.00 3. During demonetization period, there were long queues and public rush for deposit and withdrawal in banks, even bankers were not accepting such huge amount due to which we were compelled to deposit in piecemeal for safely deposit of cash of our business, we have deposited in banks in different dates. We have reasonable intention of safely deposit of our busin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Principal Commissioner of the Income Tax has grievously erred in initiating the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax has grievously erred in holding that the assessing Officer had not verified the properly transaction of cash deposition of SBN made during demonetization period during the course of proceeding and not made proper inquiry or verification finalized the order of assessment u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act is contrary to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve proposed proceedings may please be revoked as learned members of the tribunal may deem it proper. 7. Ld. Counsel Shri D.M. Rindani appearing for the assessee submitted a detailed enquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer by issuing notice u/s. 142(1) on 17.08.2019, 10.10.2019 and 14.12.2019. In response, the assessee filed detailed replies on 22.10.2019, 12.12.2019 and 24.12.2019 furnishing various bank accounts, details of cash in hand and other details as follows: 3. Details of Cash in Hand (Notice Point No. 11(3)): We herewith submit details of Cash in Hand in following format as per your requirement for your ready reference. Opening Cash in hand as on 01/04/2014 Cllosing cash in hand as on 31/03/2015 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee is required u/s. 285BA of the Act furnishing Statement of Financial Transaction (SFT) which is a reporting mechanism wherein specified entries are required to provide about material financial transaction to the Income Tax Department in Form 61A r.w. Rule 114E of the Income Tax Rules. The assessee furnished the SFT Forms relating to the ICICI Bank and Rajkot Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. which is running to 67 and 23 pages which contains the name of the purchaser of two wheeler with full Postal Address, Pincode, Nature of Transaction and amount received by the assessee. This SFT returns which are very much available with the Assessing Officer. That apart, the assessee also furnished certificate from ICICI Bank and Rajkot Nagrik Sahak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the details and also clarified with further details as requested by the Assessing Officer. Thus in our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has made necessary enquiries before passing the assessment order. The other contention of the Ld. PCIT that the A.O. failed to verify the cash deposits in HDFC Account No. 16972320000155 of Rs. 7,16,001/-. The assessee also produced the bank statement of the above account, during the demonetization period. Perusal of the same clearly shows that there were no cash transaction in the above current account as alleged by the Ld. PCIT, whereas the entire transactions were done through either cheque or NEFT mode. So the very basis of invoking 263 on the ground that the cash deposits in HDFC Bank itself, ....