KETANKUMAR RAVABHAI PATEL,HIMATNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, HIMANTNAGAR

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 09-01- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18.

The grounds of appeal are as under:-

The assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 14,48,000/- in his bank account with Bank of Baroda and cash deposit of Rs. 60,000/- in another account with the same bank during the demonetization period. The assessee filed his return of income for assessment year 2017-18 on 28-07-2017 declaring total income of Rs. 4,07,690/- and agricultural income of Rs. 2,08,978/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny on the issue of large cash deposit during demonetization period. After issuing statutory notices, the assessee furnished cash

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The ld. A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) was not right in confirming the addition as the assessee has furnished copy of cash books towards the said cash deposits. The assessee is an agriculturist and is having cash on daily basis as well as the assessee has also given the previous cash books. The ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee is carrying out multiple activities and therefore he was having the cash balance in hand and which was accepted by the Department in previous year as well as in subsequent years. The ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has filed the bank statement thereby the showing the delay in deposits of cash as well as withdrawals and in fact maintaining regular cash books. The assessee is mainly dealing with dairy products and milk business and therefore required cash in hand. The assessee is also having agricultural land which produces the agricultural

The ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee has not given any documentary evidence before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A). Merely producing bank book and not giving the supporting document about the transactions of agricultural activities. The CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition.

Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee is not only dealing with the agricultural produce on agricultural land but also dealing with the milk product for which the assessee has given the details of certificate of the respective co-operative societies. The assessee has given the details about the cash book and the cash in hand during the year and in subsequent years which was never doubted by the Revenue at any point of time. In fact, in the present assessment year also the cash books were not doubted and the activities carried out by the assessee were also not doubted. The CIT(A) has not commented anything on the evidences produced before the CIT(A) and thus the CIT(A) totally ignored the evidences. Hence, the cash deposit made

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