2025 (2) TMI 1705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1 In this case, the assessee company is seen to be engaged in the business of trading in derivatives and dealing in real estate. During the course of scrutiny assessment, it was noticed by the AO that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 71,33,000/- in his bank account maintained with HDFC. On being asked to explain the source of the said cash deposit it was informed to the Ld. AO that the deposits represented opening cash balance (as on 01.04.2016) and cash withdrawals made from time to time. The Ld. AO has depicted in tabular form at pages 2 to 6 of his order about the cash withdrawals from time to time made by the assessee. However, the Ld. AO did not believe the claim of the assessee that considering their business of real estate they....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... be deleted. 4. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 48,10,396/- which was cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee, despite the assessee having explained the source of the said deposit. The said addition was uncalled for and the same be deleted. 5. For that in the facts and circumstances of the case directions be given to re-compute the income of the assessee as per the provisions of the law and as per the proper rate of taxes. 6. For that the reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was bad in law and hence the reopening be declared to be bad in law and the reassessment order be quashed. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t 1961 is over charged and wrongly calculated and or is not applicable to the assessee case hence the interest be deleted and or correctly computed. 14. The appellant craves leave to press new, additional grounds of appeal or modify, withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal." 2. Before us, the Ld. AR vehemently argued that the assessee was a corporate entity and accounts were duly audited. The Ld. AO has not pointed out any error in the books of accounts, and has not even rejected the same. To further strengthen his arguments, the Ld. AR pointed out that while the opening cash balance of Rs. 23,22,604/- was accepted from the same set of facts then it was not understood why the substantial sums of mo....