TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1671
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... work only on rotational basis on alternate days for few hours. The office was closed frequently due to detection of new corona positive cases among staff. The assessee, therefore, submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal is due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee, which are neither intentional nor deliberate. He, therefore, pleaded to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing, for which the Ld.DR has not raised any objection. 3. We have gone through the condonation petition filed by the assessee and find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee to file the appeal belatedly before the Tribunal. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. ITA 63/Hyd/2021 (Revenue's Appeal) 4. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. The Id.CIT(Appeal) erred both in law and on facts of the case in allowing relief to the assessee. 2. The Id.CIT(Appeal) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,68,56,000/- towards unexplained cash without appreciating the fact that telescoping benefit cannot be given for the income of Rs. 26,00,00,000/- admitted for the A.Y.2017-18. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pening cash in hand was at Rs. 85,67,124/-, which is the source for cash found during the course of search and further, income declared for the F.Y.2016-17, relevant to A.Y.2017-18. The assessee had also submitted that he has declared additional income of Rs. 26,00,00,000/- for the A.Y.2017-18, to cover up various discrepancies and the said income can be telescoped against cash found during the course of search. 7. The Assessing Officer, after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taking note of cash on hand, declared by the assessee in the return of income filed for the A.Y.2017-18, rejected the explanation of the assessee and made addition of Rs. 1,68,43,950/- u/s 69A of the Act as unexplained money. Similarly, in so far as the jewellery found during the course of search, the Assessing Officer observed that although the assessee claims that the jewellery found during the course of search was declared in the wealth tax return filed for the A.Y.2010-11, in his individual capacity and his spouse, Smt.Asma Farooqi, but the fact remains that the value declared in the return was at Rs. 1,68,43,950/-, whereas, the value of jewellery found during the course of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave filed wealth tax return for the A.Y.2010-11 on 24.12.2012 and jewellery to the extent of Rs. 1,68,43,950/- was declared. The Assessing Officer made additions towards jewellery, without bringing on record any difference in the quantity of jewellery, when compared to the jewellery declared in the wealth tax return, however, considered only the value, but the assessee has explained the reasons for increase in the value of jewellery on account of appreciation in the gold prices over the period. Therefore, observed that the Assessing Officer erred in making additions towards jewellery and accordingly, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the additions made towards jewellery found during the course of search u/s 69A of the Act. 10. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the revenue as well as the assessee are in appeal before the Tribunal. 11. The Ld.Sr.AR, Shri Srinath Sadanala submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,68,56,000/- towards unexplained cash, without appreciating the fact that telescopic benefit cannot be given for the income of Rs. 26,00,00,000/- admitted for the A.Y.2017-18. The Ld.Sr.AR, further submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) err....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that during the course of search, cash of Rs. 1,68,56,000/- was found in the residential premises of the assessee. The assessee was called upon to explain the source, for which, he stated that it is out of loans received from relatives and also cash kept by his relatives for safe keeping. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee has explained the source for cash, out of opening cash in hand as on 01.04.2017 and also income earned for the F.Y.2017-18, relevant to A.Y.2018-19. Further, the assessee had also explained the source, out of additional income declared for the A.Y.2017-18 for Rs. 26,00,00,000/- The Ld.CIT(A), after considering the relevant facts has rightly allowed telescopic benefit, towards cash found during the course of search, out of additional income of Rs. 26,00,00,000/- declared by the assessee to cover up various discrepancies for the A.Y.2017-18. The findings and facts recorded by the Ld.CIT(A) is uncontroverted by the revenue with any evidences, except stating that the Assessing Officer has allowed relief by allowing....