TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 543
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee is barred by limitation by 159 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did raise objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The only issue raised by the Revenue is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 4,21,39,900/- by the ld. CIT (A) as added by the ld. AO u/s 68 of the Act in respect of undisclosed income in the form of cash sales found during the course of survey operation u/s 133A of the Act. 3.1. The facts in brief are that a survey oper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with the explanation of the assessee and accordingly, a show cause notice was issued as to why Rs. 4,21,39,900/- should not be considered as cash credit u/s 68 of the Act read with section 115BBE of the Act. The assessee filed the reply before the ld. AO which is extracted at page no.2 of para no.4.2 in the assessment order. Thereafter, the ld. AO rejected the submission of the assessee and added the amount to the income of the assessee as unexplained cash credit. The ld. CIT (A) in the appellate proceedings, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 3.2. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that there was survey u/s 133A in the case of the assessee on 30.10.2014. The assessee is d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment order. However, while computing the total income, the Ld AO reduced the said amount from the income from business computed by the assessee and again added back the same as cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. It may be noted that tax rate on business income as well as on the income as added u/s 68 of the Act by the AO was same during the assessment year in question. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), objected to the treatment of business income as cash credit u/s 68 when the AO himself admitted that the income was derived from sale of flats. In other words, the income from business was proved from the impounded documents and accepted as such and even otherwise the presumption u/s 292C was applicable that the contents of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enses in the debit side. However, the assessee has neither included the said amount in the turnover nor debited the said amount as expenses in the profit and loss account. The result was the same and the income remained the same. Since however the amount was disclosed, the assessee did not claim the amount as expenses, yet the aforesaid amount was offered for assessment by including the same in computation of total income. There was no cash credit of the said amount in the books so as to be assessed u/s 68. The decision of Jodhpur Bench of ITAT in the case of Lovish Singhal (ITA No. 143/Jodh/2018) is also cited wherein number of judgements on the issue have been relied on. The amount contested by the department was added as income from othe....