2021 (7) TMI 362 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment u/s 144 - Unexplained source u/s. 69A - HELD THAT - Assessee has closing cash balance as on 8.11.2016 at ₹ 6,42,406/-, therefore, the assessee has more cash in hand than the cash disputed by the AO at ₹ 6,31,000/-. It is not disputed that the assessment was made u/s. 144 of the Act by the AO and assessee was prevented by sufficient cause to present his case. AO has also considered the return filed by the assessee in September, 2019. Even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee uploaded the written submissions through online but could not upload the cash book, therefore, same could not be considered. In view of above, to meet the ends of justice, the matter requires to be restored to the file of the AO for fresh consideration on the basis of cash book and bank statement of the assessee. AO is directed to admit the cash book to be furnished by the assessee and pass denovo assessment. With these directions, the matter is restored to the file of the AO. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against CIT(A) order for assessment year 2017-18.

Analysis:
1. The assessee deposited old currency amounting to ?6,31,000, claiming it as normal collection from customers without providing documentary evidence. The AO treated the cash deposit as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act and added it to the assessment. The CIT(A) reduced the addition to ?4,31,000 after considering the availability of certain amounts with the assessee from regular business and the timing of the deposits in relation to demonetization.

2. The assessee's representative submitted the cash book for the relevant period, showing a closing cash balance sufficient to cover the deposited amount. However, due to technical issues in uploading the cash book online, the CIT(A) did not consider it. The representative argued that if the cash book had been reviewed, no addition would have been necessary. The matter was requested to be remanded to the AO for fresh consideration based on the cash book.

3. The DR contended that the cash book was a belated submission and supported the CIT(A)'s decision to reduce the addition to ?4,31,000 based on the available evidence. The DR urged to uphold the CIT(A)'s order.

4. Upon reviewing the cash book provided by the assessee, it was observed that the closing cash balance exceeded the disputed cash deposit amount. Considering that the assessment was made under section 144 of the Act and the assessee faced technical difficulties in submitting evidence, the Tribunal directed the matter to be remanded to the AO for a fresh assessment based on the cash book and bank statement. The AO was instructed to consider the newly furnished cash book and conduct a denovo assessment. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised by the assessee, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision to remand the matter for fresh assessment based on the newly submitted cash book.