TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 2212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udhary, all the responsibilities of business as well as family, lied in the hands of his wife i.e. Sandhya Choudhary (legal heir). 2. Sandhya Choudhary has 2 minor sons and 1 daughter and their responsibility lies with her only. The daughter of the assessee is studying in Delhi and Sandhya Choudhary needs to visit Delhi after Diwali also. 3. Due to all the above responsibilities alongwith Diwali occasion, Sandhya Choudhary could not approach her Counsel and hence appeal before your goodself could not be filed timely. 4. As soon as the legal heir of the assessee got to know about available remedy of filing Appeal before your goodself, she took necessary actions for filing the appeal at the earliest. Further, the delay in filing of Appeal is for 47 days only therefore keeping in view the above, the assessee would like to state that Rejection of Condonation Application would cause undue hardship to the assessee. In view of the above facts, you are requested to take a lenient view and kindly condone the delay in filing appeal." 5. The application is supported by the affidavit by the appellant-applicant. 6. Ld. DR for the department has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le with the assessee was 8,36,169/-. Thereafter, upto 11/11/2016 an amount of Rs. 33,64,618/- has been found debited to the cash book from receipts of cash sales and bank withdrawals. Apart from this, an amount of Rs. 6,84,000/- has also been found debited in the cash book on 11/11/2016 from certain persons. The AR of the assessee has been asked to explain the above cash receipts of Rs. 6,84,000/-as to in which connection the said amount has been received by the assessee. In response, the AR stated that the above amount has been received from the debtors. In this regard, it is pertinent to mention that the said amount of Rs. 6,84,000/- was received in old currency notes of Rs. 500/- & 1000/- during demonetization period which the assessee was not supposed to receive as per the gazetteenotification issued by the Govt. of India on 8.11.2016. Therefore, the same is liable for addition under sec. 69A of the IT Act, 1961 and to be taxed as per the provisions of sec. 115BBE of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly, the AR of the assessee has been asked to show cause as to why the addition of Rs. 6,84,000/- should not be made on the above lines. The AR has no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0A(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is being issued separately by issuing of penalty notice. 4. Subject to the above remarks, the total income of the assesee is recomputed as under :- Income as declared Rs. 7,51,930/- Add: unexplained money u/s 69A as discussed above Rs. 6,84,000/- Add: Disallowance out of 1. Dep. Deduction claimed under sec. 80C Rs. 26,357/- 1. Out of expenses as discussed above Rs. 64,761/- Total assessed income Rs. 15,27,048/- Rounded off Rs. 15,27,000/- 9. During appellate proceedings, before Learned CIT(A), the assessee appellant claimed as under:- "Facts of the case- 1. The assessee was running a petrol pump of Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. in the name of M/s Prakash Filling Station, filed the Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2017-18 on 30/10/2017, declaring total income of Rs. 7,51,930/-. 2. Part of the sales have been made by the assessee on the credit basis during the year and for which assessee regularly received payments from debtors in cash as well as in banking channels. Assessee also received due amount from its debtors prior to demonetisation period. 3. Assessee has made the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yan Chand jain 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 90,000/- Gopal Kumawat 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 1,00,000/- Hari Ram Bhairwa 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 95,000/- Bachraj Jat 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 80,000/- Mahaveer 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 1,20,000/- Hamuman Kumawat 11.11.2016 11.11.2016 90,000/- Total 6,84,000/- The confirmation from all the above debtors is also attached herewith which makes nature and source of Rs. 6,84,000/- very clear. (v) It is noted both the events i.e. transaction of sale as well as receipt for such sale has been done on 11/11/2016 only i.e. within the permissible period as mentioned in gazette notification. The assessee has not received any amount in cash from his customers for any sales made prior to the demonetisation period. (vi) However, the Ld. Assessing Officer has mentioned in Assessment Order that "the said amount of Rs. 6,84,000/- was received in old currency notes of Rs. 500/- & 1000/- during demonetization period which the assessee was not supposed to receive as per the gazette notification issued by the Govt. of India on 8.11.2016. Therefore, the same is liable for addition und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en addition u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot be made because one can accept old currency notes or not, has no relevance with Income Tax Proceedings. So, in any case the addition of Rs. 6,84,000/- made u/s 69A, by Ld. Assessing Officer is not correct. Conclusion: Keeping in consideration the facts of the case, though the assessee was permitted to accept SBN, still the question whether the assessee was eligible to accept old notes of Rs. 6,84,000/- or not on 11/11/2016 has no relevance with Income Tax Proceedings. In both the cases, the addition u/s 69A cannot be done as the nature and source of such cash is very well explained supported by documentary evidences. You are requested to kindly delete the addition of Rs. 6,84,000/- made by Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 69A and provide due relief to the assessee." 10. Before Learned CIT(A), the claim of the assessee, as noticed above, was that he made sales of Rs. 6,84,000/- on 11.11.2016, and by way of consideration, he received old currency notes on the same date. The appellant claimed there that notification dated 08.11.2016 permitted use of old currency for purchase of petrol, diesel and gas at the stations ....