TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1252
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by ignoring the fact that assessee had not furnished to the AO requisite details with respect to credit entries. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was right in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee even when the assessee was specifically asked to provide the details with respect to credit entries received from various parties along with the relevant documentary evidence. 4. The Ld. CIT Appeal has erred in deleting the entire addition of Rs. 8,44,23,000/- made by A.O. u/s 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 5. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 14,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposits without making any discussion regarding the same in their order. 6. The Appellant craves leave to add, demand or delete any of the grounds of appeal during the appellate proceedings. 3. Assessee has raised the sole ground in its Cross Objection which read as under:- "That order passed u/s 250 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 is against law and facts on the file in as much as the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4.4 On examination of the bank statement of the assessee's current account No. 079005500178 maintained with ICICI Bank, Urban Estate, Patiala, the Assessing Officer observed that during the year the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs. 14,00,000/- and non-cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 8,30,23,000/-, resulting in total deposits of Rs. 8,44,23,000/-. The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the nature and source of these credits with cogent documentary evidence. It was also observed that the assessee's bank account was used for routing funds received from one entity to another, indicating that the assessee was acting as a conduit for transfer of funds. 4.5 During the assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished complete details including the partnership deed, PAN, books of account, cash book, bank book, ledger accounts, confirmations from parties, income-tax returns and bank statements of the persons from whom the amounts were received. 4.6 It was also submitted before the A.O that the assessee was maintaining only one current account with ICICI Bank bearing account No. 079005500178 and the information relating to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome-tax Act, 1961 which read as under:- "Where in any financial year the assessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and such money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him, for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the money and the value of the bullion, jewellery or other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year." 6.3 On the basis of the above the Ld. CIT(A) observed that in the present case, the amounts credited in the bank account are duly recorded in the books of account and the assessee has satisfactorily explained the nature and source of such credits with supporting evidences. Accordingly, the mandatory conditions for invoking section 69A are not fulfilled and that the assessee comes clean as far as invoking the rigors of section 69A are concerned. 6.4 In view of the above facts an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he credited amount in the appellant's bank account was not recorded in the books of the appellant fir and the appellant had not offered any explanation about the nature and source of the credited amounts. The AO could have drawn adverse inference had there not been any satisfactory explanation about such credits. On other hand, the facts on the record demonstrate that the appellant had presented extracts of its books showing the transactions, explaining the source persons of such amounts by way of their ITRs filed with the Department, confirmations as well as extracts of their bank statements. In such circumstances, the appellant firm comes clean as far as inviting the rigors of section 69A is concerned. 5.15 In view of the foregoing discussion, I am inclined to delete the addition of Rs. 8,44,23,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act and allow the ground no. 3 of the appeal." 10. The Ld. AR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the reassessment proceedings were bad in law in as much as the reasons recorded were based on incorrect facts regarding the number of bank accounts and the quantum of credits, showing non-application of mind. It was argued that the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the deletion of Rs. 14,00,000/- on account of cash deposits was without discussion, we find that the Ld. CIT(A), having held that the entire addition under section 69A was unsustainable on facts and in law, has implicitly dealt with the cash deposits as part of the same issue. No separate material has been brought before us by the Revenue to warrant a different conclusion on this aspect. 14. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well-reasoned and speaking order after due appreciation of facts and law, and no perversity or legal infirmity has been pointed out therein. We, therefore, find no merit in the grounds raised by the Revenue. 15. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 16. The assessee has also filed a cross objection against initiation of proceedings u/s 148. The assessee vehemently argued that very initiation of proceedings u/s 148 is bad in law as after going through the reasons recorded, it can be seen that the Ld. Assessing Officer has mentioned three bank accounts pertaining to the assessee and without any verification, has worked out the alleged escapement of income at Rs. 19,....