2024 (11) TMI 1574

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Act") for Assessment Year 2017-18, dated 23.08.2023, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 15.12.2019. 1. In this case, the appellant has filed his return of income on 27.03.2018 at 'Nil' income. The Ld. AO essentially made two additions on account of interest income received (Rs. 35,63,552/-) and as unexplained cash credit on account of sums deposited in cash by the appellant during the demonetisation period (Rs. 1,25,19,600/-). It is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition on account of unexplained cash credit following the judgment in the case of Sri Bhageeratha Pattina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha, Hosadurga, ITA No. 646/Bang/2021, order dated 18.02.2022. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) also grant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Ld. DR relied on the order of Ld. AO and stated regarding the addition u/s 68 of the Act that the assessee should not have accepted currency notes which were no longer legal tender. On the issue of interest income earned, the Ld. DR relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s Totagars Cooperative Sales Society reported in 322 ITR 283 (SC). 2.1 The Ld. AR relied on the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). 3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and also gone through the authorities relied on by either side. Regarding the addition made on account of unexplained cash credit the reliance placed on the case of Sri Bhageeratha Pattina Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha (supra) is acceptable considering that the facts are remarkabl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tained by them. In view of the above said notification, the assessee has stopped collecting the demonetized notes from 14.11.2016 onwards. Accordingly, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the above said deposits were collected by the assessee prior to 14.11.2016 and it cannot be considered as violation of any of the Provisions of the Act. Accordingly, he submitted that the A.O. was not justified in invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act. 14. I heard Ld. D.R. on this issue and perused the record. I notice that the A.O. has not doubted the submissions of the assessee that the above said amount of Rs.24,47,500/- represents collection of money in the normal course of carrying on of business of the assessee, i.e., it represents money ....