2025 (5) TMI 505

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ferred in short as Ld. AO)] for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- 1) That the appellant denies its liability to be assessed at total income of Rs. 61,36,300/- and accordingly denies his liability to pay tax and interest thereon. 2) That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in making the addition of Rs. 59,50,000/- u/s 69 A of Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of unexplained cash deposits in the State Bank of India during demonetization period. However, this cash deposit majorly related to the proceeds from sale of agricultural land. 3) That having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) h....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2017 Thereafter case was selected for limited scrutiny under section 143 (3) of the with the reason ""Large Value Cash Deposits during the year AY 2017-18"". After completion of said proceedings, the Ld. AO made additions of Rs. 59,50,000.00 to the total income declared by the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 and raised a demand of Rs. 60,19,910.00. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Heard rival submissions and carefully scanned perused the material available on record. Reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erroneously confirmed the addition of Rs. 59,50,000/- under Section 69A of the Act on account of unexplained cash deposit in the SBI during....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....k of India and for which assessee replied that the agricultural land sold on 24.11.2015 for the consideration of Rs. 58,12,500/-. In this regard the Ld. AO observed that there is huge gap of 17 months between amount received of sale of land and cash deposited in the bank account and explanation furnished by the assessee regarding cash deposited of Rs. 59,50,000/- during demonetization period not acceptable only because the huge gap of 17 months. 9. The assessee assails above order by way of appeal and the ld. CIT(A) strangely dismissed the appeal by simply reproducing statement of facts and grounds of appeal and the Ld. CIT(A) nowhere discussed the merits of the case even the submission advanced by the assessee/ appellant before first ap....