DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL,MORADABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(1), NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)’/NFAC for short) dated 12/04/2024 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds taken in this appeal are as under:
“1. That the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) is bad in law as well as on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.
2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in confirming the addition on account of unexplained cash
2
Eagle Hunter Solutions Ltd. Vs. CIT(A) deposited to the extent of Rs. 1,00,26,500/- u/s 69A of the Act on the basis of presumptions and surmises and without considering the evidences and explanations given by the appellant.
3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred in considering the invocation of section 115BBE as consequential ground.
4. The above grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other.
The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or modify the above grounds of appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are that,the Assessee filed return of income declared total income of Rs. 7,85,890/-. The case of the Assessee was selected for limited scrutiny, an assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) on 22/12/2019 by making addition u/s 69A of the Act on account of excess credit in bank account of Rs. 2,62,73,508/- and another addition u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposited during the demonetization period, Rs. 23,04,500/- and also disallowed deduction under Chapter VIA of Rs. 1,50,481/-. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 22/12/2019, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 12/04/2024, confirmed the addition made on account of unexplained cash deposit to an extent of Rs. 1,00,26,500/- made by the 3 A.O. u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 5. The Ld. Assessee's Representative addressing on the grounds of Appeal submitted that the books of the Assessee are subject to tax audit and the tax audit along with balance sheet were duly produced before the A.O. during the remand proceedings. The bank account of the Assessee reflects that the Assessee had withdrawn Rs. 1,00,26,500/- from his bank account and cash book has been examined by the A.O. The withdrawals and the deposits are duly recorded in the books of accounts, however, the Revenue authorities without bringing any material on record to show that the cash deposited in the bank account is not out of the cash withdrawn and without establishing the fact that such withdrawn cash has been used for any other purpose, erroneously addition has been made by the A.O. which has been confirmed by the Ld. Rs. 1,00,26,500/- which can be corroborated from the bank statement starting from 02/04/2016 to 31/03/2017 and the Department has not disputed the said fact. The Revenue neither brought any material on record to show that the cash deposited in the bank account is not out of the cash withdrawn and nor brought any evidence to show that the cash withdrawal made by the Assessee has been used for any other purpose. Date: 04.06.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S*