Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 08.10.2024 for the AY 2017-18.
The only issue raised by the assessee is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹69,57,500/- as made by the AO u/s 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in respect of cash deposit during demonetization period.
The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 04.11.2017, declaring total income of ₹9,64,510/-, which was
In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) called for the remand report from the ld. AO and accordingly, the remand report was submitted on 26.02.2024. The ld. CIT (A) after taking into account the remand report and the reply of the assessee came to the conclusion that the assessee has failed to provide sufficient authentic documentary evidences to explain the cash deposits and therefore, justified the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer.
The ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the order passed by the ld. AO is patently wrong and against the provisions of the Act. The ld. AR submitted that though the assessee could not file all the
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that in this case the amount stated to be deposited in the bank accounts during demonetization period was treated as business receipt by the assessee which has been accepted by the AO as well as by the ld. CIT (A). Accordingly, the net profit was calculated as per the profit and loss account which is also been accepted and books were not rejected by either of the authorities below. Thereafter the ld. AO has added ₹69,57,500/- as unexplained
More On the issue of wrong invocation of provisions of Section 69A the Act, we observe that the same is not applicable to the transactions recorded in the books of accounts maintained by the assessee. For the sake of convenience, the provisions of section 69A are extracted as below:
69A. Where in any financial year the assessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and such money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the [Assessing] Officer, satisfactory, the money and the value of the bullion, jewellery or other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year.] 08. A perusal of above section reveals that it deals with unexplained money in the form of bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles which are not recorded in the books of account if maintained by the assessee for any source of income and the assessee has not offered any explanation about nature and source of acquisition of money,
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025.