NILESHKUMAR GOVINDBHAI BHARWAD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(10) NOW WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1353/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the cash deposits were out of the assessee's milk trading business, supported by cash book entries and bank statements. Therefore, no further addition was warranted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a milk trader, deposited Rs. 33,51,051/- in his bank account. The Assessing Officer treated these cash deposits as unexplained under Section 69A, and the CIT(A) sustained the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits in a bank account are unexplained and liable for addition, and if Section 115BBE is applicable when income is offered under Section 44AD.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 44AD,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Pamil H. Shah
Hearing: 07/10/2024Pronounced: 07/10/2024

Asstt.Year : 2017-18 Nileshkumar Govindbhai ITO, Ward-3(2)(10) Bharwad V Now 3(2)(1) 375, Bharwad Vas, s Ahmedabad. Ramol Road, Ramol Ahmedabad 382 0449. PAN : BIGPB 1722 F (Applicant) (Responent) : Assessee by Shri Pamil H. Shah Revenue by : Shri Ravindra, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 07/10/2024 घोषणा क� तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/10/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 18.6.2024 for the Asst.Year 2017-18 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short).

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal are as under:

1.

The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case, in sustaining addition u/s.69 of Rs.33,51,051/-, on account of cash deposit and credit entries in bank.

2. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case, in confirming the applicability of provisions of section 115 BBE of the income tax act.

3.

The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeal

at the time of hearing, if need arise.

3. The assessee is a trader in milk, fact of which is not being in dispute. The assessee has deposited total amount of Rs.33,51,051/- in his bank account. The AO has stated this cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The same has been confirmed by the ld.CIT(A).

4.

The aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

Before me, the assessee explained that the assessee has filed its return of income declaring its profit under section 44AD, and hence insistence of the ld.CIT(A) to produce books of accounts and other records is a irrelevant.

On the other hand, the ld.DR argued that the cash deposits have not been duly explained by the assessee.

6.

I have gone through the cash book prepared out of the bank statements. The cash sales have been made by the assessee from 1.4.2016 to 31.3.2017, which had opening balance of Rs.8501/- , the cash sales during that period was Rs.24,20,600/-. There are cash withdrawals from the bank to the tune of Rs.4,40,800/- . The bank statement thereof clearly reveals that the cash deposits, withdrawals and transfer of amounts to various dairies were in connection with the trading of milk. The average cash sales out of the milk trade to the tune of Rs.2.50 lakhs, and keeping in view the year-long milk trading operation, it can be held that the cash deposits are out of the milk trade, and the

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Dictated on the Open Court, typed and pronounced on 7th October, 2024.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →