TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1249
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 16/12/2019, passed under Section 143(3)of the Income Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of INR. 1,23,56,000/- made being unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act without appreciating that addition was made on account of absence of supporting evidences of cash sale and after considering the Assessee's previous sale pattern, cash deposit trend and other discrepancies and inconsistencies brought out by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. 2. On the facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deposits of INR.1,23,56,000/- were made during demonetization period, notice was issued under Section 133(6) of the Act to the respective banks for obtaining the bank statements vide notice dated 06/12/2019. The Assessee was asked to provide explanation regarding the aforesaid cash deposits. In response, the Assessee vide reply dated 13/12/2019 stating that the source of cash deposits were cash sales made by the Assessee during the relevant period. In support the Assessee filed cash book and list/ledger of sales. The Assessing Officer was not convinced about the veracity of the documents furnished by the Assessee and, therefore, arrived at a conclusion that the Assessee had manipulated the records by not disclosing true and correct facts. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s occurred for the period 06 11 2016 to 08.11.2016 just before the demonetization period as unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act. However, the income earned by the appellant in the form of cash sales has already been offered to tax. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking the provisions of Section 69A of the Act to make an addition, when the appellant herself had disclosed the cash sales in the return of income and recorded the same in the audited books of accounts. The provisions of Section 69A cannot be applied in cases where the cash deposits in question are reflected in the books of accounts and form part of the income already offered to tax. Moreover, the AO had not rejected the books of account of the appellant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eliance upon the same, we find that nothing was brought on record by the Revenue to disturb/dispute the factual findings recorded by the Learned CIT(A) in paragraph 4 above. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer had not rejected the books of accounts of the Assessee. Further, it is also clear that the transaction of cash sales and cash deposits made in the bank accounts were disclosed by the Assessee in the books of accounts given. We are of the view that the Learned CIT(A) was correct in concluding that the provisions contained in Section 69A of the Act could not have been invoked in the facts and circumstances of the present case. A bare perusal of Section 69A of the Act would show that the provisions containe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of accounts and offered to tax by the Assessee. The Assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing, retail, and wholesale of gold jewellery. During the Assessment Year 2017-18, the Assessee made cash sales of gold ornaments amounting to 3,02,51,598/-, which formed part of the total turnover. These transactions were recorded in the books of accounts, and the profit element arising from them was duly offered for taxation, which is not in dispute. The Assessing Officer framed the assessment under section 143(3) and treated the said cash sales as non-genuine. The Assessing Officer rejected the books of accounts under section 145(3) of the Act and made an addition under section 68 of the Act, alleging that the sales were unsubstantiated ....