Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (9) TMI 1269 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Addition of unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-12.
2. Imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 2010-11.

Issue 1: Addition of unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-12:

The appellant challenged the addition of Rs. 8,00,000 as unexplained cash deposits under section 69A. The Assessing Officer treated the cash deposit as unexplained and added it to the total income. The appellant contended that the amount was from various legitimate sources and provided detailed explanations, including income from farming, kirana business, sale of agricultural land, and tailoring receipts. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's failure to make submissions. However, the Tribunal found that the appellant had fulfilled all requirements and provided satisfactory explanations for the cash deposits. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition under section 69A, allowing all grounds raised by the appellant.

Issue 2: Imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 2010-11:

The appellant challenged the penalty imposed under section 271(1)(c) based on the quantum addition made by the Assessing Officer, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). However, the Tribunal had already deleted the quantum addition in the appellant's appeal for the assessment year 2011-12. As a result, since the basis for imposing the penalty was eliminated, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's ground of appeal, refraining from adjudicating on the merits of the penalty case. Consequently, the appeal filed by the appellant was allowed, and the penalty was not upheld.

In conclusion, both appeals filed by the appellant were allowed by the Tribunal. The order was pronounced in the open court on 14/08/2024.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates