TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1758
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....voking Section 69A. The addition made by the A.O and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is arbitrary, illegal and not justified. 2. Without prejudice to above ground, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 9,00,000/- without appreciating the fact that the bank account in which cash deposits/transactions were made does not belong to appellant. 3. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any of the ground/s of appeal." 2. Facts as per records are that the addition has been made by the Assessing Officer on the ground of unexplained cash deposits u/s. 69A of the Act as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee and such cash deposits were made during the demonetization period amounting to Rs. 9 lacs. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC upheld the addition of Rs. 9 lacs made by the Assessing Officer. For the sake of completeness, the relevant paras are culled out as follows: "5. Decision: 5.1 The grounds of appeal, assessment order, submissions of the appellant and the relevant Judicial pronouncements have been carefully considered and accordingly grounds of appeal filed by the appellant Is adjudicated as under, 5.2 It is observed that during the assessment proceedings, the AO has accepted the source of cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 16,00,000/- as it was disclosed by Mr. Subba Raju Moturi in his Individual capacity. Whereas, the cash deposits of balance amount of Rs. 9,00,000/- was added in the appellant's cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- subsequently in the SBI bank A/C No.3620649124 on 31.10.2016 with reconciliation of said bank accounts vide letter of CIT(A), NFAC dated 12.11.2024. Whereas, the appellant did not furnish the said details despite opportunity of being heard given. 5.6 Hence, I am of the considered view that the appellant did not discharge his onus of proving the genuineness of the said cash deposits of Rs. 9,00,000/-. Accordingly, addition made by the AO on account of the said cash deposits of Rs. 9,00,000/- in the hands of appellant's firm is sustainable. In view of the facts of the case, the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant are hereby dismissed on merit. 6. In the end result, the appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed."....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Sections 250(4) and 250(6) of the Act, statement of the assessee was not accepted and it was dismissed per-se; (ii) the assessee had explained the source of cash deposits by furnishing the bank statements of the SBI accounts of the partners where he had withdrawn an amount of Rs. 10 lacs and out of which, he had made cash deposits of Rs. 9 lacs in the relevant bank account. So the source of the cash deposits has been explained by the assessee and if the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC was still not satisfied as regards the genuineness of the source of the cash deposits, he could have undertaken an independent inquiry with regard to the same, which was not done in the present case. In that effect, the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC becomes cry....