2024 (6) TMI 63

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 15.12.2019 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, deriving income from saree designing, filed her return of income for the A.Y.2017- 18, admitting total income at Rs. 3,54,500/- for the A.Y. 2017-18. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to examine the cash deposit during demonetisaton period. Subsequently, statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee along with questionnaire, calling for information through ITBA on 29.04.2019 to explain the sources for the cash deposits made during demonetisation period along with documentary evidence. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d brought to tax u/s 69A of the Act under the head "other sources". 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) granted partial relief of Rs. 2,50,000/- out of Rs. 10,80,000/- by relying on the SOP issued by CBDT regarding verification of cash transaction relating to demonetization period in Instruction No.03/2017 dated 21.02.2019 and confirmed the remaining addition of Rs. 8,30,000/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal : 1. The order of the CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and the law. 2. The CIT(A) has not verified the fact of submission of the gift d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed for addition, beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny for which the case was selected and not valid in the eyes of law. He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), delete the entire addition made and allow the appeal of the assessee. 7. Per contra, the Ld.DR relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) is justified in granting part relief to the assessee as per CBDT Instruction No.03/2017 dated 21.02.2019 and confirming the balance addition as the assessee failed to establish the identify, genuineness and credit worthiness of the transactions. He, therefore, pleaded to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 8. I have heard both the parties and p....