9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed there on 04.03.2008 there is no case for the Revenue that the said amount, appearing in the books was not explained - That the balance cash was appearing in the books, itself is sufficient evidence to show that it stood explained - Assessing Officer has not been able to point out why any of the entries in such cash book resulting in such cash balance could not have been believed - Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 1599/Kol./ 2011 - - - Dated:- 19-12-2013 - Shri Mahavir Singh And Shri Abraham P. George,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri A. P. Roy, Sr. D. R. For the Respondent : Shri S. Choudhury and Shri T. K. Chakraborty, A. R. ORDER Per Abraham P. George : 1. This appeal filed by the Revenue is against an order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not explain the balance of Rs.3,79,65,399/- as on 01.03.2008, appearing in the cash book maintained in Tally package. He, therefore, treated the entire cash balance as unexplained cash credit and made an addition under section 68 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, assessee moved in appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals). As per the assessee, cash received from parties, cash withdrawals and cash deposits in Bank along with Excise Duty payments would clearly show that many of the entries for payments were not recorded in the print-out, which was taken on 04.03.2008. As per the assessee, the payments were not properly recorded and even deposits in the Bank were not shown. Assessee stated that a proper reconciliation was submitted before the Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cash reflected in the cash book could only be considered as unexplained income or income from unexplained sources. It was not disclosed to the Department. Therefore, according to ld. DR, ld. CIT(Appeals) fell in error in deleting the addition. 7. Per contra, ld. AR submitted that the assessee had indeed filed the summary as well as all the details both before the Assessing Officer and CIT(Appeals). Assessing Officer in the remand report had not brought out any infirmity in the reconciliation filed. Therefore, according to him, ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in deleting the addition. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find from the record that printout taken from the computer on the date of surv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on 23.10.2007...... 2769362.72 Add. Cash receipt from party(A)........ 156 54860.00 Add. Cash withdrawn from Bank(B).. 41984670.00 60408892.72 Less: Cash deposited in Bank (C)... 15557585.00 Less: Excise duty (D+E+F)............... 4304 2000.00 Less: Other expenses (G)................. 1733862.32 60333447 .32 Cash balance as o n 04.03.2008... 75445.40 Assessing Officer had offered no comments on the reconciliation given by the assessee. It is an admitted fact that there was no physical cash found from the assessee's premises on 04.03.2008. At this juncture, it is necessary to have a look at se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arding source of the credits has been offered. Even if we presume that cash balance of Rs.3,79,65,399/- was indeed there on 04.03.2008 there is no case for the Revenue that the said amount, appearing in the books was not explained. That the balance cash was appearing in the books, itself is sufficient evidence to show that it stood explained. Assessing Officer has not been able to point out why any of the entries in such cash book resulting in such cash balance could not have been believed. In such circumstances, in our considered opinion section 68 was not at all attracted. We are, therefore, of the opinion that ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in deleting the addition. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
