MAHALAXMI TRANSPORT ,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), MUMBAI

“The learned CIT (A) has erred in making addition of amount Rs 1,53,70,440/- made towards cash deposited in the Bank account without going into the facts of the case. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/ or delete the above grounds of Appeal

We note that assessee has not been granted opportunity of being heard in the present facts of the case. In the interest of justice we remand this issue back to the file of Ld.AO for necessary verification considering the fact that the year under consideration persist to the financial year in which the demonetized cash was deposited into the bank account of the assessee. 3.1. It is also noted that, the authorities below did not consider following circulars issued by the CBDT in order to verify the demonetized cash deposited into the accounts of the assessee. a) The 1ST instruction was issued on 21/02/2017 by instruction number 03/2017. b) The 2nd instruction was issued on 03/03/2017 instruction number 4/2017. c) The 3rd instruction was in the form of a circular dated 15/11/2017 in F. No. 225/363/2017-ITA.II and the last one dated 09/08/2019 in F. No.225/145/2019-ITA.II. 3.2. The assessing officer is directed to verify the demonetised cash deposited during the year under consideration based on the circular that is applicable to the assessee in the present facts. The assessee is directed to furnish PAN and KYC details of all the depositors in Page | 3 order to assist the Ld.AO to consider the claim in accordance with law. Accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose.