TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1314
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 144 of the Act, on 11.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: "1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred on facts and in law in partly confirming addition of Rs. 7,48,000/- being cash deposited in bank account treating as unexplained. 2. The Income Tax officer has erred on facts and in law in making addition of Rs. 12,48,000/- by treating cash deposited in bank account as unexplained. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred on facts and in laws in partly confirming the addition of Rs. 7,48,000/-." 3. This appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 572 days. The assessee has moved a petition for c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the decision of I.T.A.T., 'C' Bench, Kolkata in the case of M/s. Garg Bros. Pvt. Ltd. & Others vs. DCIT [ITA Nos.2519 to 2521/Kol/2017, order dated 18.04.2018], wherein under similar set of facts and reasons, the Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to condone the delay of 211 days by holding as under: "3. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the application for condonation of delay, we are of the considered opinion that assessee was under a bona fide belief that the impugned order of Pr. CIT was not appealable before this Tribunal since they were not advised by their Tax Consultants about this legal right. Later on, when a Senior Lawyer advised them to file an appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....instructions issued by CBDT, in the form of SOP dated 21/02/2017, verification was carried out, in respect of the transactions of cash deposits made in bank account relating to demonetization period and it was found that the assessee has not filed return of income for assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18. Therefore, a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 21.12.2017, requesting the assessee to file the return of income, which was duly served to the assessee. In response to the notice the assessee had not made any compliance. Accordingly, the assessee`s case was selected for scrutiny, keeping in view the instruction issued as SOP for handling of cases related to substantial cash deposit during demonetization period dated 05/03/2019. Further, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the bank account statements, it was noticed by the assessing officer that assessee earned interest of Rs. 3,508/- on saving bank account and of Rs. 83,462/- from term deposit. Total amount of interest income earned by the assessee during the year under consideration was to the tune of Rs. 86,970/- (Rs.3,508 + Rs. 83,462), which was also added to the total income of the assessee. 10. Aggrieved by the order of the assessing officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who has partly deleted the addition. The learned CIT(A) had considered the statement of facts, of the assessee, wherein assessee has stated that he was engaged in business of selling milk. It was stated by the assessee, before ld.CIT(A) tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Learned Counsel for the assessee, argued that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee has submitted the possible evidences before the old Assessing Officer to prove the cash deposit in the bank account to the tune of Rs. 10,48,000/- during the demonetization period. However, total aggregate cash deposited by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 12,48,000/-, was disallowed by the assessing officer. The Ld. Counsel submitted that although the order was framed under Section 144 of the Act, by the assessing officer, however, the assessee had submitted all the possible evidences before the old assessing officer as well as, before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has produced cash book for A.Y. 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 to explain the source o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owever, I find that assessee is not subject to audit, therefore, cash book submitted by the assessee, is self -servicing document, hence, cannot be relied. On the one hand, the assessee submitted that he is a very small businessman, selling Milk only, and did not file the return of income, on the other hand, the assessee is claiming that he is maintaining systematic books of accounts for the previous years and for the subsequent assessment years, therefore, the addition should be deleted, as the assessee has opening cash balance. This is entirely a cooked story and hence benefits should not be given to the assessee on account of opening cash balance in its cashbook, as the assessee, did not file the return of income and assessee, being a Mi....