J.J. ENTERPRISES ,SANGLI vs. NFAC, SANGLI

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in F & O (Derivative trading). It filed its return of income for assessment year 2015-16 on 25.09.2015 declaring a total loss of Rs.32,82,377/-. As per information available with the department that the assessee had been involved in trading of stocks and futures, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO") noted that the assessee has made cash credit in the ICICI Bank account to an amount of Rs.14,45,000/- during the financial year 2014-15 relevant to assessment year 2015-

Based on information received from SEBI and also verification of data, notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on 31.03.2021 after obtaining prior approval of PCIT, Pune-1 in response to which the assessee filed its return of income declaring a total loss of Rs.34,29,120/-. Thereafter, a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee in response to which the assessee filed its objection for reopening of assessment. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer disposed of the objections of the assessee. A notice u/s 133(6) was issued to ICICI Bank on 10.12.2022 in response to which a reply was received from the Bank. Further, a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee calling for information with regard to the share transaction and the source of all the credit entries along with documentary evidences. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.14,45,000/- to the total income of the assessee as unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A of the Act, vide his order dated 27.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under:

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, all these relate to the addition of Rs.14,45,000/- made by the Ld. AO as unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A of the Act.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. We find the Ld. AO in the instant case made addition of Rs.14,45,000/- to the total income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposit made in the bank account the source of which remained unexplained by the assessee by filing the requisite documentary evidence. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for the reasons which we have already reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC has sustained the addition made by the Ld. AO on the ground that the explanation given by the assessee regarding the source of cash deposits is not corroborated by any evidence. Since nothing has been brought to our notice, to take a contrary view than the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, therefore, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

DR, ITAT, ‘SMC’ Bench, Pune

The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, ////