Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 30,76,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits. The assessee contended that the deposits were fees collected from clients for IELTS consultancy and were duly offered for tax.
Held
The Tribunal held that the AO's observation that the deposits were from unexplained sources was factually incorrect. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided evidence, including cash vouchers, and had included the receipts in its tax return.
Key Issues
Whether the cash deposits in the assessee's bank account were from unexplained sources and if the addition made by the AO was justified.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HYBRID HEARING आदेश/Order The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [in short referred to as CIT(A)] dated 15.01.2024 relating to assessment year 2012-13. 2. The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.30,76,000/- made by the AO on account of A.Y. 2012-13 2 unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the observation of the AO that the said amount found deposited in the bank account of the assessee was out of unexplained sources was factually not correct. She has submitted that in fact, said amount was collected by the assessee from various clients on account of IELTS Consultancy Fees. She has further submitted that even the assessee has duly considered and included the gross receipts in its Income Tax Return for the purpose of paying the due taxes. She has further submitted that the assessee has duly furnished all the cash vouchers wherein the names and addresses of the clients and amount of fees collected has been duly mentioned.
The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid submissions.
In view of this, I do not find justification on the part of the lower authorities in confirming the above addition. -2024 A.Y. 2012-13 3 The order of the CIT(A) is, therefore, set aside and the impugned addition is ordered to be deleted.
The appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced on 17 t h April, 2025. ( SANJAY GARG) "या"यक सद"य/ Judicial Member “Poonam.”