A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-3, ASANSOL, ASANSOL vs. SRI RAHUL KUMAR SARAF, MUMBAI

This appeal of the assessee arises out of the order of Learned CIT(A), Asansol, in Appeal No.307/CIT(A)/Asl/W-3(1)/Asl/11-12, dated 02.09.2013, arising out of the order of assessment framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1) Asansol u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

The only issue to decide in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of Rs.1,19,37,425/- towards cash deposits in bank account u/s.68 of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Brief facts of this issue is that the assessee is a proprietorship concern n the name and style of M/s Geet Govind Global. The assessee is an importer and trader of edible and non-edible oil, chemicals, timber, bleaching and Fuller Earth. Ld. AO found that there was cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee for which proper explanation were not given and accordingly brought the sum of Rs.1,19,37,425/- to tax as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act.

Before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted various details and argued that the said deposits in bank account were duly reflected in the books of accounts regularly maintained by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) called for remand report from the ld. AO vide proceedings No.CIT(A)/Asl/13-14/10-11, dated 4-4-2013 as below :-

Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds :-

None appeared on behalf of the revenue. We find that out of 25 cases listed before the bench today, the revenue has sought adjournment in all the cases. Ld. AR stated that this issue is covered by the remand report submitted by ld. AO who had accepted the contentions of the assessee in the remand proceedings. In these circumstances, the adjournment petition of the revenue is rejected and we proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits on hearing ld. AR.

We have considered the contentions of ld. AR. We find that ld. AO had accepted all the contusions of assessee that entire cash deposits were duly accounted for in the books of accounts of the assessee and, hence, there is no question of adding any amount thereon as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. We also found that the ld. AO had not given any adverse comments in the remand report with regard to the contentions of the assessee. We find that the ld. CIT(A) rightly granted relief by placing reliance on the remand report. We hold that the ld. AO having accepted to the contentions of the assessee in the remand report ought not to have preferred any appeal before us. We do not find justifiable reason to inter with the order of ld. CIT(A) in this regard. Accordingly grounds raised by the revenue are dismissed.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.