TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 75
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- "1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE] grievously erred both in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 48,02,549/- IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT FOR WHICH DETIALED AND ELABORATE SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHED TO THE LD. A.O AS ALSO, AS MANY AS SEVEN WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FROM TIME TO TIME TO LD NFAC The sources of such deposits being evident from audited books of account which are not rejected, the addition ought not to be made and sustained. It be deleted now. 2. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE) grievously erred both in law and on facts in confirming the patently wrong addition of Rs. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5/- in respect of Commission expenses for which complete details were furnished to Id. AO with appellants reply dated 18.12.2019 regarding sales affected through agents and also TDS deducted. The expenses being incurred in normal course of business ought not to be disallowed. The same ought to be deleted. It be deleted now. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE) grievously erred both in law and on facts in not reproducing and considering all previous submissions made to NFAC from time to time in which complete and elaborate submissions and details with regard to erroneous addition/ disallowance were furnished. The same ought to be considered properly while passing a cryptic order after....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing. The assessee filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2017-18 on 17.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 63,05,580/-. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made three major additions/disallowances. Firstly, an addition of Rs. 25,00,000/- was made under section 68 of the Act in respect of an unsecured loan received from M/s Jainson, on the ground that the bank statement of the creditor did not reflect the corresponding debit entry, though the assessee had filed confirmation and contra account. Secondly, an addition of Rs. 48,02,549/- was made under section 68 of the Act in respect of cash deposits made in bank accounts during the demonetization period. The assessee explained that these cash depo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from sundry debtors and explained withdrawals, and that once sales were accepted and taxed in the profit and loss account, treating the same receipts again as unexplained cash credit would result in double taxation. The assessee relied upon several judicial precedents including decisions of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court and the Tribunal to contend that section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked in respect of sales recorded in regular books of account. As regards commission expenses, it was submitted that commission was paid in the normal course of business through banking channels, tax was deducted at source and similar expenditure had been allowed in earlier years. 6. The CIT(Appeals), after considering the material on record, partly acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts during the demonetization period, which were admittedly recorded as sales and business receipts in the audited books of account, can be sustained in law. The ancillary issue relates to the disallowance of commission expenses and the applicability of section 115BBE. 9. From the record, it is an undisputed fact that the assessee is carrying on regular business, maintains audited books of account, and the books of account have not been rejected by the Assessing Officer. It is also not in dispute that the cash deposits in question are duly reflected in the cash book and bank book, and that the corresponding sales have been credited to the profit and loss account and offered to tax. The Assessing Officer has nowhere disputed the quantitati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Sureshkumar Periwal, IT(SS)A No. 153/Ahd/2023 and ITA No. 1116/Ahd/2023, order dated 22.04.2025. For the sake of completeness and to bring clarity, we reproduce paragraphs 15 to 18 of the said judgment verbatim as under: "15. The Ld. CIT(A) further relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT in the case of Shri Sanand Textile Industries Limited vs DCIT, 995/Ahd/2014, dated 6th January, 2020 wherein it is held as under: '9.5 From the above, we note that the provisions of section 68 of the Act can be attracted where there is a credit found in the books of accounts and the assessee failed to offer any explanation or the offer made by the assessee is not satisfactory in the opinion of the assessing officer. T....