Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK , CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 Nrusingha Charan Nrusingha Charan Sahoom, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, At: Nagapur, PO: Nagapur, At: Nagapur, PO: Nagapur, Puri Ward, Puri Puri Ward, Puri Gop, Puri. PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.EGQPS 5716 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Naresh Singh Rathore sh Singh Rathore Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 15/0 05/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 15/0 /05/2024 O R D E R
This is an appeal filed by the assessee aga This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld inst the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 29,.6.2022 in Appeal No. in Appeal No.CIT(A),Bhubaneswar- 2/10206/2019 2/10206/2019-20 for the assessment year 2017-18.
Shri Naresh Naresh Singh Rathore, ld AR appeared for the assessee. Shri appeared for the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. represented on behalf of the revenue.
The appeal is delayed by 565 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is delayed by 565 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is delayed by 565 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition supported by affidavit. In the petition, it is stated that petition supported by affidavit. In the petition, it is stated that petition supported by affidavit. In the petition, it is stated that the assessee is a class 10th standard and is doing the business of mobile the assessee is a class 10 standard and is doing the business of mobile recharge and he had no knowledge about assessment proceedings being recharge and he had no knowledge about assessment proceedings being recharge and he had no knowledge about assessment proceedings being
P a g e 1 | 4 conducted in his case much less the appellate proceedings. It was only after the recovery proceedings started and the bank account is attached, the assessee came to know the fact and searched the tax consultant to do the needful. Ld AR of the assessee reiterated the submission made in the condonation petition and submitted that the delay in filing of the may be condoned. Ld Sr DR did not have any serious objection. Considering the fact that the assesse is a 10th standard and is doing small business of mobile recharge, in the interest of justice, the delay of 565 days in filing of the appeal is condoned the appeal is disposed of on merits.
It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a Mobile Recharge Agent. It was the submission that the assessee had deposited Rs.1,90,000/- in his bank account in the form of SBN notes. It was the submission that the assessee was permitted by Reserve Bank of India to collect top up recharge upto Rs.500 . Ld AR has also placed before me the copy of the deposit details of old currency of Rs.190000/-, which is as follows:
Sl.No. Date of deposit Total cash deposit Old currency 1. 14.11.2016 1,25,780 1,15,000 2. 15.11.2016 57,680 47,000 3. 17,11,2016 37,450 8,000 4. 28,.11.2016 53,275 5,000 5. 1.12.2016 19,340 15,000 2,93,525 1,90,000
P a g e 2 | 4 It was the prayer that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by ld CIT(A) be deleted.
5. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer and ld CIT(A).
I have considered the rival submissions. It is an admitted fact that the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- have been treated by the Government as not to be questioned. In the present case, the assessee has deposited only Rs.1,90,000/- as specified bank notes (SBN) in his bank account. The assessee has produced the dates of deposit of the amount. The assessee is also permitted by Reserve Bank of India to collect SNB notes upto Rs.500/- for recharge of prepaid connection in mobile, which clearly shows that these are within the limit prescribed by RBI. This being so, in the interest of justice, the addition as made by the AO and confirmed by ld CIT(A) stands deleted.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed .
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 15/05/2024.