2025 (11) TMI 88

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... against the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act, dated 10.12.2019. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "1) For that the Grounds of Appeal hereto arc without prejudice to one another. 2) For that in the facts and circumstances of the ease ld. CIT (A) is not justified in not giving proper time to substantiate its claim which is violative of principal of natural justice. 3) For that the learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 70,19,628/- as unexplained cash credit as u/s 69A of the I.T. Act,1961 Income assessed is taxed u/s 115 BBE of the Act at the rate of 60%. Whenever, the fact is on record that the appellant was engaged in communi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....documents/evidence, the amount of cash deposits of Rs. 70,19,628/- has been treated by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') as unexplained money and added to the total income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act. 4. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was mentioned in the Statement of Facts that the assessee is engaged in business of communication service provider (CSP) of State Bank of India and copy of registration certificate was enclosed. During the year under consideration he had made transaction out of collection from customers and the commission as per the agreement was his only source of income. The Customer Service Points, often referred to as C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sited by him in his bank account. During the entire period for the above mentioned year total cash deposited to the tune of Rs. 70,19,628/- and out of total amount only Rs. 11,36,000/- was deposited during the demonization period i.e. 09/11/2016 to 31/12/20216. It was submitted that the assessee had deposited cash during the demonetization period out of the collected money on behalf of the bank. As regards the addition to the income of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) noted that both parties to the lis viz. the Ld. A.O. as well as the appellant had alleged that adequate evidences had not been brought on to record and the Ld. AO was forced to pass the assessment order u/s 144 of the Act. Hence, keeping in view the newly inserted proviso to secti....