HOTEL FAKIRCHAND DHABA,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), NAGPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 10/03/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18.
In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.1,51,000/- as unexplained Income u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in not accepting the fact that the cash deposit of Rs.1,51,000/- of demonitised currency was out of the sale proceeds and bank balance of Rs.2,54,344.52 as on 08.11.2016.
Hotel Fakirchand Dhaba ITA no.126/Nag./2023
The assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is running business of Bar and Restaurant. He has deposited ` 1.50 lakh cash in the bank account. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee has not been able to substantiate cash deposit, however, it is submitted that cash deposits are from sales while running the business of Bar and Restaurant. The Assessing Officer, however, has denied the claim of expenditure made by the assessee.
When the matter was carried before the learned first appellate authority, the learned CIT(A) also confirmed the order so passed by the Assessing Officer.
I have heard the arguments of the learned Departmental Representative, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. I find that the assessee has specifically mentioned that cash deposits are sales from running the business of Bar and Restaurant wherein generally the customers pay cash in lieu of the consumption of food, liquor, etc. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the amount so received by the assessee on sale from running the business of bar and restaurants and being a meagre amount of ` 1.50 lakh, the same cannot be doubted. According to my opinion, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the order passed by the Assessing Officer while confirming the addition. Thus, I set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and allow the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.
Hotel Fakirchand Dhaba ITA no.126/Nag./2023
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/08/2024
Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 21/08/2024 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
