2025 (2) TMI 1845

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CIT(A)"] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066276004(1) dated 30.06.2024 for the A.Y.2017-18 arising out of the order passed under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 13.11.2019. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are, assessee is an individual deriving income from business and other sources filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 28.03.2018 admitting a total income of Rs. 5,00,000/- besides agricultural income of Rs. 1,75,000/-. Subsequently, the case has been selected for limited scrutiny through CASS to verify the "cash deposits during demonetization period". Accordingly statutory notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1 4400 28.03.2015 9,41,000/- 02 8765 04.05.2015 5,00,000/- 03 VSGL-23 27.05.2016 3,50,000/- 4. Ld. AO observed that the assessee has taken Rs. 14,41,000/- during the period 28.03.2015 to 04.05.2015 and thereafter issued a show-cause notice for holding huge cash for a period of nearly 20 to 21 months and to show cause why it should not be taxed. Assessee submitted his reply on 04.11.2019 stating that the gold loan was taken with an intention of starting a new business. Ld.AO found the explanation by the assessee is not acceptable thereafter proceeded to make an addition of Rs. 20,15,000/- under section 69A of the Act. 5. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... He therefore pleaded that since the source of the cash deposits have been established no addition can be made under section 69A of the Act. 9. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short "Ld.DR"] placed heavy reliance on the orders of the Revenue Authorities and further submitted that assessee has taken gold loan and kept cash in ideal for the period of more than 20 to 21 months. Ld. DR further submitted that no person will keep such huge amounts in cash by making the interest payments thereby incurring cost on holding the cash. She therefore pleaded that order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 10. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record and orders of the lower authorities. It was t....