2026 (8) TMI 688

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of the case are assessee being an individual filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 17.07.2017 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,80,000/-. The case was subsequently selected for limited scrutiny through CASS. Accordingly, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 04.09.2018 and served on 06.09.2018. The limited issue for which scrutiny was taken is with respect to cash deposited during demonetization period. Assessee filed his response electronically through e-proceedings. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act on 17.05.2019, 19.08.2019 and 28.11.2019 calling for information. It was noticed that assessee has made cash deposits during demonetization period amounting to Rs. 15 lakhs (Rs.10 lakh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e learned CIT[A] is not justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made as unexplained cash deposit u/s. 69 of the Act in respect of the cash deposited in State Bank of India A/c.No.30976745565, under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3. The learned CIT[A] s not justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- being the cash deposited in in Kotak Mahindra Bank A/c.No.242010014483, as unexplained Cash deposit u/s. 69 of the Act, under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 3.1 The additions made and sustained u/s. 69 of the Act is opposed to law and facts of the appellant's case in as much as, the cash deposits and other deposits made are from known....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 3,11,674/- for Assessment Year 2017-18. Similarly, he also submitted that HUF also received rental income of about Rs. 2,80,000/- for Assessment Year 2015-16 and Rs. 2,94,000/- for Assessment Year 2016-17. He therefore pleaded that since sufficient source for the cash has been established by the assessee, addition made by the learned AO and sustained by the learned CIT(A) is not justifiable. 6. Per contra, the learned DR relied on the Order of the Revenue authorities. 7. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that assessee has received cash gift of Rs. 10 lakhs from his mother which was deposited into the bank of the assessee during demonetization period. Further, i....