Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which upheld an addition of Rs. 58,23,000/- made by the AO as unexplained cash credit. The case was selected for scrutiny due to large cash deposits during demonetization, but the assessee failed to provide proper explanation to the AO and CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide any valid explanation for the cash deposits in the bank account despite ample opportunities. Therefore, the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was upheld.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of Rs. 58,23,000/- as unexplained cash credit is justified when the assessee failed to provide a valid explanation for the source of cash deposits, and whether the imposition of interest u/s 234B is valid.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250, 69A, 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
order
: 29-May-2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2017-18 dated 08.02.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 23.12.2019.
Page 2 of 7 Page 3 of 7
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.