2025 (12) TMI 183

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, 'AO') u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 27.12.2019. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 23,29,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, treating genuine cash deposits during demonetization as unexplained, without properly appreciating the facts and evidence. 2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution, despite appellant's request for adjournment, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 3. The learned CIT(A) failed to consider that the cash deposit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....imal Pan Masalla and Shikari Bidi. The books of account are maintained in regular course of business, which are supported by purchase and sale vouchers, expenditure details, cash book, stock register, journal etc. The books of account are audited and copy of the same was submitted to the department. It was further submitted that the assessee is regularly depositing nearly the same amount of cash in his bank account every month out of sale proceeds from his regular business. The assessee makes RTGS to the creditors for further purchases out of the cash deposited in the bank account. Out of total cash deposit of Rs. 34,43,760/-, the specified banking note (SBN) was only Rs. 12,29,000/-. Hence, no addition is needed. 3.1 The AO considered t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... parte despite appellant's compliance record. Due to change of the consultant, the appellant did not receive the notices issued by the CIT(A). In support, he has enclosed a screen shot wherein the view assigned form of the CA was deactivated. He, therefore, submitted that the appellant could not attend for bona fide reasons. In any case, all the details had been submitted to the AO which was before the CIT(A). Therefore, the CIT(A) should not have dismissed the appeal of the appellant. 5.1 The Ld. AR further submitted that the books of account are regularly maintained by the assessee and are duly audited u/s 44AB of the Act. During demonetization, cash of Rs. 12,29,000/- (SBN) were deposited in the bank account. This was out of the avail....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n record. We have also deliberated on the decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR. The appellant is a wholesale trader of Vimal Pan Masalla and Shikari Bidi. There is no dispute regarding the fact that the appellant had deposited cash of Rs. 34,43,760/- during the demonetization period including cash of Rs. 12,29,000/- by way of SBN in bank account. The total turnover of the appellant in the subject year was Rs. 5,01,70,254/-. He has been consistently depositing cash in the range of Rs. 40-45 lakhs per month from the cash sales of his regular business in his bank account maintained with Bank of Baroda. The appellant makes RTGS to the suppliers/creditors for further purchases out of the cash deposited in the bank account. The AO has added only t....