TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1656
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cash deposited during demonetization period ignoring the fact that the sales in cash were made by the assessee w.e.f 1.4.2016 to 31.03.2017, however, cash was deposited in bank w.e.f 21.11.2016 i.e. after demonetization. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on the facts and in law, in ignoring the fact that no prudent businessman will just keep on accumulating cash inspite of the fact that payment for all the purchases to be made by the assessee were to be done through the bank account only. 3. The appellant craves to add, alter or amend any/all of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of the hearing of the appeal." 2. Facts in brief of the case are that the assessee filed return of income, declaring total income of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in his bank account. He further submitted that the AO after examining the past history had rightly and in a justifiable manner, made the impugned addition. Thus, he prayed for setting aside the finding of Ld.CIT(A) and restoration of the findings as recorded by the AO. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee opposed these submissions and reiterated the submissions as made in the written synopsis. He further submitted that the AO erroneously did not consider the submission made in response to the notice. He drew our attention to page 11 of the Paper Book in support of his contention that the assessee had duly responded to the show cause notice. He submitted that under the facts of the present case where the AO accepted the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Assessing Authority. 8. We have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The AO vide order dated 09.12.2019 had made the impugned addition on the basis that the assessee could not support the source and the sales were increased by two folds of the sales pertaining to the immediately preceding Assessment Year 2016-17. This findings of the AO is reversed by the Ld.CIT(A) by observing as under:- 5.2 Observations and Findings: i. "Sale turnover of the assessee during the year under consideration is 2.54 crores and in immediately preceding year i.e., A.Y. 2016-17 the turnover was 1.25 crores. ii. Sales made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....➤ Aadhar cards of all 49 customers. viii. In assessment order as well as remand report, the Id. AO could not identify any defect in sales register, stock register, purchase register and cash book. ix. Once the books of account for F.Y. 2016-17 have been accepted by the Id. AO and the cash sales recorded therein were considered in arriving at the assessed income of the Assessee for the financial year under consideration, then treating the cash deposited in banks against such cash sales as undisclosed income of the Assessee is not sustainable. 5.3. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. KAILASH JEWELLERY HOUSE in Appeal No. ITA 613/2010 has held that, "3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, which are purely in the nature of the factual findings, do not require any interference and, in any event, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. The appeal is dismissed." 5.4. In view of the above discussion, judicial decisions and remand report submitted by the Id. AO, the addition of Rs. 71,49,000/- made by the AO u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act on account of unexplained cash deposits is not found to be sustainable and therefore same is deleted and these grounds of appeal are hereby allowed." 9. In the present case, the AO has invoked the provision of section 69A r.w.s115BE of the Act. For the sake of clarity, section 69A of the Act is reproduced as under:- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee disclosed the sales and duly recorded in his books of accounts. It cannot be inferred that sales were made out of books of accounts but the AO doubted about the genuineness of the transaction. Admittedly, the book result is not disturbed, same has been accepted. The only reason for treating the amount credited in the bank account as deemed income of the assessee as per AO, is that there was astronomical rise in the sales during post demonetization period. Undisputedly, in the absence of any explanation from the assessee, the AO had invoked the provision of section 69A of the Act. However, before Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had filed certain evidences which were admitted and after calling remand report from AO and perusing the materia....