TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1362
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8. 2. In this appeal, the Revenue has raised the following grounds: - "1, "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CITA) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 70,91,351/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 without appreciating the fact that the assessee was unable to prove the delivery of Gold to Mr. Dhanraj G. Parmar ?" 2, "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 70,91,351/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 whereas the AO has established that the assessee had used Gold purchaser Mr. Dhanraj G. Parmar as conduct of unaccounted money bring into Bank account as Mr. Dhanraj ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as well as section 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, information was received from the DDIT (Investigation), Unit-5(1), Mumbai in relation to the transaction with one Mr. Dhanraj G Parmar. In the said information it was mentioned that Mr. Dhanraj G Parmar has bought gold from M/s Tulsi Darshan Gold, M/s V.P. Bullion, M/s S.P.N. Gold Pvt. Ltd., and M/s Jai Vaishnav Bullion, and sold the gold to the customers who wish to convert the cash available with them during the demonetisation period. Accordingly, summons under section 131 of the Act were issued to the aforesaid entities, including the assessee. In response thereto, copies of purchases and sales bills, stock statements, bank st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....armar were declared as revenue receipts by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) deleted the addition made under section 68 of the Act. 5. During the hearing, the learned AR submitted that the sales made to Mr. Dhanraj G Parmar have been recorded by the assessee in its profit and loss account and due tax thereon has been paid by the assessee. From the perusal of the record, we find that the AO accepted the fact that payments of Rs. 20,93,388 were received on 22/11/2016, Rs. 29,49,980 were received on 24/11/2016, and Rs. 20,47,983 received by the assessee on 29/11/2016 through banking channel from Mr. Dhanraj G Parmar. Further, the learned CIT(A) noted that the aforesaid payments were in respect of the gold purchased by Mr. Dhanraj G Parmar on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... therefore gold was purchased by various parties as it is a very safe investment. The AO vide assessment order did not agree with the contention of the assessee and held that the assessee has failed to reply to the query as to why out of 365 days only on a single particular day there is a cash sale of Rs. 48,98,152. The AO further held that the assessee has not submitted cash memos/invoices for verification of cash sales. Thus, the AO held that the cash sales of Rs. 48,98,152 remain unexplained by the assessee. 8. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, deleted the addition made by the AO on this issue by observing as follows: - "4.3.1 As regards to cash deposited of Rs. 48,98,153/- by the appellant on 08.11.2016 and treating t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ler having long present in the market, the customer stepped in his shop in large number with the old currency and hence therefore there is a cash sale during the year under consideration. 4.3.3. It is a fact that the demonetisation was taken place on 08/11/2016 and because of which public was very anxious to convert the SBN into other form. Purchasing of Gold or jewellery was considered as very good option as can be referred for that days headline of several New Channels & News Articles. Further, all the details called for has been produced/submitted before the AO. However, he could not pointed out any mistake in purchases made, availability of stock, sales etc. and accordingly the AO has accepted the book result by not rejecting t....