SULTANALI RASHIDA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD 15 (3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1054/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 February 2023AY 2017-20182 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the other income of Rs. 3 Lacs was accepted by the AO, and the rejection of the opening cash balance was not justified as it was carried forward from earlier years. Therefore, the addition was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 6 Lacs in cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer (AO) reduced the opening cash balance and rejected other income receipts as a source, leading to an addition of Rs. 5 Lacs. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 5 Lacs on account of cash deposits during demonetization is justified, considering the accepted other income and opening cash balance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B/SMC’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 11-11-2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 21-12-2019.

2.

The only grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of Rs.5 Lacs which represent cash deposited by the assessee on various dates during demonetization period as tabulated in para-5 of the assessment order. The assessee made aggregate deposit of Rs.6 Lacs. Upon analysis of the cash book for F.Y 2016-17, Ld. AO did not accept the opening cash balance for Rs.2.27 Lacs and reduced the - 2 - same to Rs.1.00 Lacs. Further, the receipts of other income of Rs.3 Lacs as reflected by the assessee in the return of income were not accepted as source of cash and addition of Rs.5 Lacs was confirmed. The Ld. CIT(A) endorsed the view of Ld. AO against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

I find that the assessee as reflected other income of Rs.3 Lacs in the return of income which has been accepted by Ld. AO. Therefore, there is no reason to reject the same. The rejection of opening cash balance is also not justified since the same is carried over from earlier years. Therefore, the impugned addition is not sustainable. I direct Ld. AO to delete the same.

4.

The appeal sand allowed.

Order pronounced on 22nd February, 2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →