2024 (3) TMI 1432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 20.11.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 50,000/- on account of cash deposited in bank account treated as alleged unexplained cash deposit u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that the above addition may please be deleted as learned members of the Tribunal may deem it proper. 3. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 13.05.2019 requesting to furnish the details regarding the nature and source of the cash deposited to the bank account. The assessee, vide her reply dated 22.05.2019, submitted that the bank account No. 25010021001006815 in which cash deposited amounting to Rs. 9,00,000/- belongs to her husband Jatin J. Bamaria, HUF. In regard to the cash deposited during the demonetization in bank account No. 25010021001006363 amounting to Rs. 3,00,000, she submitted that the said account belongs to her and she deposited cash of Rs. 3,00,000/- out of cash-on-hand and tuition fee etc. 5. Further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 06.08.2019 through ITBA to collect specifi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent earlier that small deposits made in the banks by artisans, workers, housewives, etc., would not be questioned by the Income Tax Department in view of the fact that present exemption limit for Income tax is Rs. 2.5 lakh". Therefore, ld JCIT(A) granted part relief to the assessee for an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- and balance Rs. 50,000/- ( Rs. 3,00,000-Rs.2,50,000) addition made by the Assessing Officer was upheld. 7. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 8. We heard both sides in detail and also perused the records of the case. Shri Bipin Jariwala, Ld. Counsel for the assessee, argued that out of Rs. 3 lakh Rs. 2.50 lakh was deleted by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). However....