Loading...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2025 (4) TMI 2037

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d with a delay of 149 days. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said petition, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 10 grounds of appeal, amongst which, the only issue emanates for consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition made to an extent of Rs..19,31,240/- under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act" in short]. 4. Brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee is an individual, running a provision stores in the capaci....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....12,50,843/-. Further, she refer to another son by name Shri K. Kumaravel who looks after M/s. Kavi Medicals has admitted to have closing cash balance of Rs.11,39,830/-. She argued that the Assessing Officer did not give any consideration to the said closing cash balance as offered during the course of assessment proceedings. The ld. CIT(A), without having any basis, given relief only on the basis of assessment, which is not justified. The ld. AR vehemently argued that the said seized cash does not belonging to the assessee, which is substantiated by evidence, cannot be made addition under section 69A of the Act and drew our attention to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. A.N. Dyaneswaran 297 ITR 135. She ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-. Further, the ld. CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee in respect of sale consideration as received on the sale of immovable property. Further, we note that in the ITR for AY 2020-21 of Mr. Kumaravel, son of the assessee, who conducts business under the name and style of M/s. Kavi Medicals, has shown cash in hand at Rs..11,31,883/-, which is evident from page 28 of the paper book. Further, another son Mr. Srinivasan, who conducts business by name M/s. Kavi Super Market has shown cash in hand at Rs..23,22,733/-, which is evident from his ITR for AY 2020-21 placed at page No. 142 of the paper book. On examination of all the details with the findings of the ld. CIT(A) clearly demonstrate that the cash found in assessee's residence was of ....