TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 1902
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... multiple ground of appeal, however, in my considered view the substantial ground of appeal relates to upholding the addition under section 69A on account of cash deposit during demonetization period. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was individual and engaged in the business of brick kiln (Bhatta). During the assessment, the Assessing Officer recorded that he has information that during demonetization period, the assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 45.00 lakhs with Bank of Maharashtra, Branch at Sector Alpha, Greater Noida. The Assessing Officer issued show-cause notice of substantiate such cash deposit. The Assessing Officer also obtained information from bankers of the assessee. The banker of assessee informed that the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....during November, 2019. Due to loss in the business, the assessee was under depression and taking medical treatment, copy of one of such medical prescription by Dr Rajesh Goyal consultant physician from Sir Ganga Ram Hospital is placed on record. Before the assessee could recover from his illness, nationwide lockdown was declared due to covid-19. On recovery from illness of depression, the assessee could filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 21.10.2021. The assessee in statement of facts pleaded such facts for condoning the delay. The learned CIT(A) instead of condoning the delay dismissed the appeal in limine. There was sufficient and reasonable cause for condoning the delay. There was no intentional delay in filing appeal before ld CIT(A).....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sit of Rs. 98.51 lakhs. Assessment for AY 2016- 17 was completed on 04.03.2024, wherein income of the assessee was accepted under section 44AD on offering total sales of Rs. 42.38 lakhs. The learned AR further submits that instead of remitting the matter back to the ld. CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer, it would be appropriate estimated a reasonable component of income on the basis of assessment for AY 2016- 17. The legal heir/ appellant has no much evidences or means to contest the long drown process of litigation with department. The ld. AR voluntarily offered that 8% of cash deposit of Rs. 45.00 lakhs may be accepted as reasonable. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Sr DR) for the Revenue submits that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... their power and possession, however, she has placed on record a copy of assessment order for AY 2016-17 dated 04.03.2025. On careful perusal of assessment order for AY 2016-17, I find that in para- 3.4 the Assessing Officer has recorded that the assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 98.51 lakhs. However, the assessee offered income under section 44AD on presumptive basis on total turnover of Rs. 42.38 lakhs, which was accepted and income of assessee was estimation of income @8% of Rs. 42.38 lakhs was accepted. I find that the Assessing Officer in AY 2016-17 has accepted estimation of income @8% of Rs. 42.38 lakhs despite the fact that total cash deposit during preceding year was more than Rs. 98 lakhs. 9. Now, turning to the facts for year ....