Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH
अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate IJथG की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M: Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [NFAC], Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 03.01.2024.
There is a delay of 35 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has given reason for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and heard the :- 2 -: counsel. We are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is condoned.
The only effective ground of appeal in this case is against the addition of deposit of Specified Bank Notes (SBN) of Rs. 63,500/- in the bank account of the assessee during demonetization period.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and running proprietary concerns in the business of selling sugarcane and tender coconut under the name of M/s. Surya Hotel. The assessee has filed his return of income of Rs. 12,38,970/- on 26.10.2017. The assessee has made cash deposit of Rs. 5,13,500/- in SBNs during demonetization period. The A.O has accepted the deposit of Rs. 4,50,000/- made between 09.11.2016 to 14.11.2016 as deposits was made during reasonable period of time from the announcement of demonetization. The A.O did not accept the deposits of Rs. 63,500/- from 28.11.2016 to 14.12.2016 as the deposits were beyond reasonable time of 1 week. :- 3 -: 5. Being aggrieved, the assessed filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by A.O as the assessee has not made submissions in support of his case.
The Ld. AR has contended that the window for depositing the cash was opened from 09.11.2016 to 14.11.2016 and cash was deposited during the said period. The Ld. AR further submitted that the delay in deposit within a week cannot be a reason to make addition if the assessee was allowed to deposit the SBNs till 14.12.2016 by the notification and the source of cash was not doubted.
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard rival contentions and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The A.O has made addition of Rs. 63,500/-, merely because the assessee has not deposited the SBNs between 09.11.2016 to 14.11.2016 i.e., within a week of announcement of demonetisation. The A.O has accepted the SBNs deposit of Rs. 4,50,000/- deposited till 14.11.2016. The A.O has not brought out any material that the SBNs of Rs. 63,500/- was unexplained. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition without considering the relevant facts and therefore, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) :- 4 -: and order AO to delete the addition . In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on 21st August, 2024. (यस यस िव"ने" रिव) (जगदीश) (Jagadish) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य /Accountant Member सद"य सद"य / Judicial Member "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 21st August, 2024. EDN/-