SOUNDARAPANDIAN EDISON AMAL RAJ,SALIGRAMAM vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(8), CHENNAI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017- 18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 19-10-2023 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld.
ITA No.1314/Chny/2023 :- 2 -:
Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 21-12-2019. The
grounds raised by the assessee are as under:
The order dated 17.10.2023 of the Learned CIT(A) faceless authority in ITA DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1057222872(1) for the Assessment year AY 2017-2018 is contrary to facts, opposed to law and untenable. 2. Ld CIT(A) faceless grossly erred in not examining the details cash deposits by the students filed in the Appellate proceedings. 3. The learned Assessing Officer erred in adding the cash deposits collected from the students who have directly deposited the cash during the demonetization period. 3.1 The Ld CIT(A) and Ld AO further grossly erred in not considering the cash deposits during the entire year and disallowing the deposits only during demonetization period.
3.2 The Ld CIT(A) and Ld AO ought to have considered that the Appellant is carrying on training of Students in various Centres across the State. 3.3 Ld AO ought to have considered that the business model is collecting cash from the Students in the earlier years and subsequent years.”
All the above three grounds are revolving around the central
controversy of addition of cash deposit of Rs. 40,80,787/- and hence
are adjudicated together. The brief facts of the case are that the A.O
noted there were cash deposits in assessee’s bank account during the
demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 amounting to
Rs. 19,44,419/-. The A.O also noted that there were total cash
deposits of Rs. 40,80,787/-. It is the case of the A.O that the assessee
failed to file any cash book for verification of cash of deposits and
ITA No.1314/Chny/2023 :- 3 -:
merely submitted that the cash represents fees collected from students
and which was directly deposited by their parents in assessee’s bank
accounts. For want of supportive evidence, the A.O met the addition
of Rs. 40,80,787/-.
The first appellate authority wholly concurred with the findings of
the A.O and dismissed assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved by the order, the
assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
During the course of present proceedings, the Ld. A.R of the
assessee reiterated the same set of arguments and heavily relied
upon documents filed before lower authorities. The assessee
submitted that as per its present business practices, the students /
their parents are permitted to directly deposit the requisite fees into the
indicated bank accounts of the assessee. It was thus stated that the
said statements assume the status of cash book of the assessee and
which was filed before the A.O.
The Ld. D.R vehemently argued in favour of order of authorities
below. It was submitted that even the details, stated by the assessee
to be in the nature of cash book, filed by the assessee suffer from
inconsistencies like no names of persons are clearly evident.
ITA No.1314/Chny/2023 :- 4 -:
We have heard rival submissions in the light of facts of the case
and evidences placed on record. It is noteworthy that the A.O has
written in the opening para of the order that the inquiry letters were
issued to the assessee with the objective of inquiring the cash deposits
made during the demonetization period. In that scheme of things, the
A.O ought to have made addition, if any of Rs. 19,44,419/- being the
cash deposits appearing in assessee’s account qua the
demonetization period and not of entire cash deposits. Be that as it
may, it is seen that there are instances in the cash details filed by the
assessee where specific details of the depositors are not available.
We hold the view that justice would be met if the matter is restored
back to the file of A.O for examining the cash deposits in detail. The
order passed by the A.O is set aside for fresh adjudication. The A.O is
directed to verify the cash deposits of the assessee in detail and pass
an assessment order afresh in accordance with law. The assessee is
directed to render all cooperation to the A.O in this regard. Hence, the
appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
ITA No.1314/Chny/2023 :- 5 -:
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30th April, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (यस यस यस यस यस यस यस िव�ने� यस िव�ने� रिव रिव रिव) रिव (�ी अिमताभ अिमताभ अिमताभ शु�ला अिमताभ िव�ने� िव�ने� शु�ला शु�ला) शु�ला (SS Viswanethra Ravi) (Amitabh Shukla) लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक सद�य �याियक सद�य / Judicial Member �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य
चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 30th April, 2024. EDN/- आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF
