TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 743
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der Operational Collapse of Employer Company and Documentary Constraints due to fraud investigations. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the employer company ceased operations, its directors absconded, and the company was under investigation by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), making it practically impossible for the appellant to obtain confirmation letters from the employer. 2. The CIT(A) has erred by unjustly rejecting the appellant's explanation despite prima facie evidence of fiduciary utilization which establishes a clear nexus between the deposits and their utilization for the business purpose of the employer, without application of mind and without further enquiry violating....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting Officer (COO) for the employer company. 7. Improper Allegation of Non-Compliance with Notice under Section 148 The CIT(A) incorrectly stated that the appellant failed to file a return in response to the notice under Section 148, whereas the return was filed within the prescribed time. 8. Inadequate Opportunity to Respond to Show Cause Notice (SCN) The appellant was given only two days to respond to the SCN issued on 12th March 2022, which was an unreasonably short period and in violation of principles of natural justice. 9. Personal Grounds - Severe Hardship Due to Injustice The negligence of the AO and CIT(A) has caused extreme financial distress and mental agony to the appellant, which also contributed to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2,87,45,230/- respectively. Out of this cash deposits, withdrawals were Rs. 2,62,74,090/- and Rs. 3,69,00,800/- respectively. The assessee submitted reply and the relevant part is incorporated by the AO in his Order. The learned Counsel submitted that he utilized amount for real estate promotions and was paid to M/s. Google India(P) Ltd., and the invoice were raised by M/s. Google India (P) Ltd. The entire payments have been made through bank The assessee has other subsidiary companies. The AO observed as under: 7. Reasons for executing google Ad purchases through the Assessee a) The Company was not allowed to take Either Debit Card or Credit Card in the company Name. b) The Directors did not have credit card and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ating agencies have initiated investigation proceedings which is clear from the newspapers. Bank statements were submitted showing the payments to Google India (P) Ltd. Assessee submitted various submissions on different dates and it was not accepted by the AO observing that the assessee is unable to explain the source of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. Therefore, the entire cash deposits of Rs. 2,81,96,500/- was treated as income under section 69A of the Act as unexplained money and added to the total income of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved from the Order of the FAA, assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alf of Dreamz group company and other details are also placed on record at Paper Book Page No.25. Assessee has not got any benefit. He received salary only from the company. Therefore, the addition could not be made in the hands of the assessee. She also submitted that the assessee is unable to get any documents from the company to verify the entries made in the company's books and company has been declared as a defunct company and there is no updation in the MCA portal. He relied on the submissions made in Pages 304 to 312 of the Paper Book. 6. On the other hand, learned DR relied on the Order of the lower authorities. 7. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that the assessee is an employee of the company M/s. Dreamz Infra Ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s considered only the cash deposits but the utilization of such deposits have not been examined to prove the real beneficiary of such cash deposits. Why the AO has added the cash deposits in the assessee's bank account in the hands of the assessee entirely? Here in the case on hand, the source is completely explained as per observation of the AO. Noted supra. The assessee has filed details of expenditure incurred from his bank account which is placed at P.B. page No. 24 to 26 . If the AO was not satisfied he could have taken action against the company since the real owner of the cash deposited is company. Accordingly, we direct to the JAO(jurisdictional Assessing Officer) to verify the withdrawals and decide the issue as per law after givin....