Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 25,66,000/- under Section 68 for cash deposited in the assessee's bank account. The assessee contended that the amount was received from debtors for past sales and provided detailed explanations and bifurcation.
Held
The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation credible as the revenue authorities presented no contrary evidence or disputed the details provided. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.
Key Issues
Whether the addition under Section 68 for cash deposits was justified when the assessee provided a detailed explanation from debtors, and whether the rejection of books of accounts under Section 145(3) was proper.
Sections Cited
68, 145(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 08.01.2025 relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
(1) The Learned Commissioner (Appeal) failed to understand the facts and circumstances of the case. Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– (2) The Learned Commissioner (Appeal) erred in fact and in law in making addition of Rs. 25,66,000/- under Section 68 of the Income-Tax Act. (3) The Learned Commissioner (Appeal) erred in fact and in law in rejecting books of accounts under Section 145(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. (4) Your Appellant preys for appropriate relief on above grounds of appeal. (5) Your Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal stated hereinabove.
3. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.25,66,000/- owing to the cash deposited in the bank account. The assessee has furnished detailed submission before the Revenue authorities and explained clearly that the money has been received from the debtors to whom sale have been made in the past. The assessee has also attached the bifurcation amount of Rs.25,66,000/- showing from whom such money has been received along with the outstanding that was received from such parties. These details have not been disputed by the revenue authorities, and no contrary evidence has been brought on record. In view of the specific facts and circumstances of the case, we find merit in the explanation furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted, and the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.