POLUPALLI DURAISWAMY ANBARASAN,KRISHNAGIRI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), SALEM

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.

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.