BHAVESH C JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 14(1)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 984/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 July 2018AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's business transactions were reflected in the books of account. However, due to lack of confirmations from parties from whom cash was received, the AO made the addition. The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in cheque discounting, declared a total income of Rs. 1,40,778/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 15,95,000/- on account of cash deposits, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of cash deposits under Section 69 was warranted without considering the assessee's books of account and the nature of business, and whether credit for cash withdrawals should have been given.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit SinghShri Bhavesh C. Jain Dr. Vigas Street Corner

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah
For Respondent: Shri B.D. Jain
Hearing: 03.07.2018

This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-25, Mumbai dated 07.11.2013 for A.Y. 2009-10 in the matter of order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter “the Act”).

2.

In this appeal the assessee is aggrieved for the addition of `15,95,038/-.

3.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Briefly stated, the assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 on 30.11.2009 declaring total income of `1,40,778/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served on the assessee. The order under Section 143(3) was passed on 30.12.2011, making addition of cash deposits of `15,95,000/- under Section 69 of the Shri Bhavesh C. Jain Act and thereby determining the total income at `17,35,778/-. By the impugned order the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO, against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4.

We have considered the rival contentions carefully and gone through the orders of the Authorities below and found from record that the assessee is carrying on business of discounting of cheques, wherein cash was accepted and after deducting his commission assessee was issuing cheques to the parties. Similarly, while making payments the assessee was accepting cheques and after deducting his commission used to pay the cash to the parties. During the course of assessment the AO did not agree with the assessee’s nature of business and therefore added the entire amount of cash deposit in assessee’s account. It was the contention of the learned A.R. that all the business transactions pertaining to the addition of `1,95,000/- are properly reflected in the books of account/cash book filed before the AO, therefore the addition is not warranted under Section 69 of the Act. He further submitted that the assessee has filed his return of income on 30th November, 2009 vide Machine No. 1414004087 showing details of all items of Profit & Loss Account, Balance Sheet and the Capital Account, etc. The assessee’s Profit & Loss Account is based on the transactions recorded in the books of accounts, copy of which has been filed before your goodself by way of Paper Book comprising pages 1 to 41. Copy of cash book for the period 1st April, 2008 to 31st March, 2009 appears at pages 13 to 18 of the Paper Book.

5.

From the record we find that small cash was deposited by the assessee against which he used to issue cheques. Income on account of discount and commission was offered to tax in the return but since the assessee did not file any confirmation from the persons from whom cash was received, the AO made addition in respect of the entire cash deposited in the bank. We find that there was also withdrawal of cash from the very same bank account, accordingly credit for the same was required to be given to by the assessee. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and nature of business of the assessee we

Shri Bhavesh C. Jain restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh assessment after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We direct accordingly

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →