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 (11) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (11) TMI 1187 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
Appeal against order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding huge sales made by the Assessee from Parwanoo, lack of bank account and strong room, and cash deposits during demonetization.

Analysis:
The Department filed an appeal before the Tribunal challenging the Assessee's sales from Parwanoo, a smaller station compared to Ludhiana, made in cash without a bank account or strong room in Parwanoo. The Department raised concerns about the feasibility of such operations and alleged tax evasion by the Assessee.

The Assessee, engaged in jewelry trading, operated from Ludhiana and Parwanoo. The Assessing Officer disallowed a substantial amount under section 68 of the Act due to cash deposits during demonetization. The Assessee maintained that the cash deposits were from regular sales and provided various documents to support the existence and operations of the Parwanoo branch.

The ld. CIT(A) found discrepancies in the Department's claims and accepted the Assessee's explanations. The CIT(A) highlighted flaws in the Inspector's report, lack of formal statements, and cross-examination. The Assessee's history of cash deposits and documentation convinced the CIT(A) that the sales were genuine, leading to the deletion of the addition.

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that once purchases and stock were accepted, sales should not be doubted. The Tribunal found no reason to question the Assessee's cash deposits, especially when VAT collections and filings were in order. Double taxation was deemed unjustifiable, and the Assessee's explanations were considered genuine and supported by documentation.

In conclusion, the Departmental appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision. The Tribunal found the Assessee's explanations reasonable, supported by evidence, and rejected the notion of double taxation. The order was pronounced on 14.06.2024.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates