Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an agriculturist and milk seller, had an assessment reopened under Section 148 for cash deposits made in a bank account. The Assessing Officer made an ex-parte addition for unexplained money under Section 69A and for gold purchase. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition related to cash deposits but deleted the addition for gold purchase.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of cash deposits totaling Rs.11,70,500/-, which included cash sales and withdrawals from the same bank, through a reconciliation statement. Since these explanations were not properly considered, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the Rs.11,02,000/- addition confirmed by the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the income tax authorities were justified in confirming the addition for unexplained cash deposits under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE, despite the assessee providing a reconciliation statement demonstrating the sources from cash sales and bank withdrawals.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 69, 69A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar
ITA No: 1796/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kishor Prahaldrai Asawa Income Tax Officer 241, Vijay Industrial Ward-3(3)(5), Estate, Odhav, Vs Ahmedabad Ahmedabad Gujarat-382415 PAN: AIBPA8297N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Pritesh Shah, CA Revenue Represented: Shri S. K. Agal, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 24-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-04-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14.
The registry has noted that there is a delay of one day in filing the above appeal which is hereby condoned.
A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Kishor Prahaladrai Asawa vs. ITO
Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an agriculturist and also engaged in selling of Milks. For the Asst. Year 2017-18, assessee has not filed his Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2013- 14. The assessee made cash deposits in his bank account maintained with Bank of Baroda. Therefore the assessment was reopened by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. In response, the assessee filed a Return of Income on 22-02-2021 declaring total income of Rs.1,51,390/-. The Assessing Officer issued various notices, due to technical glitches, the same were not received by the assessee which has resulted in passing exparte assessment order making addition of Rs.13,88,527/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act and Rs.30,42,200/- on purchase of Gold in commodity trading and demanded tax thereon.
On appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition on account of cash deposit and however deleted the addition on account of purchase of Gold in commodity trade and partly allowed the appeal.
Aggrieved against the appellate order, assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:
1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition made by A.O. in respect of cash deposited to the Bank amounting to Rs.11,02,000/- under section 69 read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, such addition is requested to be deleted.
6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed before us a reconciliation statement of bank accounts, wherein cash deposits made between 09-04-2012 to 07-03-2013 of Rs. 11,70,500/-. Similarly source of cash deposit out of cash sales on various dates of Rs.2,10,500/- A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 3 Kishor Prahaladrai Asawa vs. ITO and withdrawal from the bank of Rs.9,60,000/- were demonstrated before us. Without considering the same, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition and requested to delete the same.
7. Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue could not dispute the source of cash deposits, however supported the order passed by the Lower Authorities. It is seen from the CIT(A)’s order, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 2,86,527/- based on the explanation namely deposit of own savings fund by the assessee but upheld the addition of Rs.11,02,000/- as not explained properly. Whereas in the reconciliation statement, the assessee has demonstrated the source out of cash sales of Rs. 2, 10,500/- and cash withdrawal from same bank of Rs. 9,60,000/-. Therefore, the addition confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to be deleted.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed.