9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see had stated that it had not sold any such machines while the sale made by the assessee related to embroidery machines. Thus addition cannot be made by holding the cash deposits as unexplained - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No.1158/Chd/2016 - - - Dated:- 15-6-2018 - Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Amandeep Vats For the Respondent : Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl .CIT ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M. : This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Ludhiana dated 24.8.2016 relating to assessment year 2008-09. 2. The sole issue in the present appeal relates to addition made on account of cash found deposited in the bank which remained unexplained to the extent of ₹ 4,50,000/-. The assessee has raised following grounds with respect to the same.: 1. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)I, Ludhiana has erred in sustaining the addition of ₹ 4,50,000/- on account of amount deposited into bank account against the sale of machinery. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Ludhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15-05-2006 for ₹ 2,10,000/- and ₹ 2,04,000/- respectfully and both were sold for ₹ 4,50,000/- on 13-04-2007 suffering a loss of ₹ 24,000/- and the amount was deposited cash in the account. Photocopy of the bank statement showing the purchase of machinery is enclosed. 6. The Ld. counsel for assessee further stated that even as per the narration of the entry in the bank account statement submitted by the bank the cash deposited had been reflected as being from the sale of machinery which fact when confronted by the Assessing Officer to the bank was confirmed by the bank stating that the said description of the entry had been made on the basis of verbal request of the assessee. The Ld. counsel for assessee drew our attention to the findings of the Assessing Officer in this regard at para 10 of his order: 10.The explanation of the assessee with regard to deposit of cash in his bank account is discussed as under. (i)Deposit of cash of ₹ 4,50,000/- on 13/4/2007 The narration of the entry dated 13.4.07 in bank account statement has been as sale of machinery. The assessee in his statement recorded on 09.08.2010 has stated on oath that he d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him was relating to purchase as well as sale of machinery pertaining to only flat machinery to which the assessee had replied as no, while the machinery sold was a knitting and embroidery machinery and, therefore, the statement of the assessee could not be read against him for upholding the addition of ₹ 4,50,000/-. The Ld. counsel for assessee further stated that the Ld.CIT(Appeals) had rejected the assessee s explanation by refusing to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee by way of sale invoice of the machinery sold. The Ld. counsel for assessee stated that in the first place the said invoice was not an additional evidence as the same had been filed before the Assessing Officer also and the assessee had not requested admission of the same before the Ld.CIT(Appeals) as additional evidence. Our attention was drawn to the submissions made before the CIT(Appeals) and it was pointed out therefrom that the assessee had only requested the admission of the cash flow statement filed before the CIT(Appeals) as additional evidence. The relevant submissions of the assessee reproduced at para 2.2 of the order of the CIT(Appeals) are as under: On the captioned subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied upon the order of the CIT(Appeals) and stated that the additional evidence filed by the assessee in the form of sale invoice of the machinery sold had been rightly rejected since the assessee had failed to show as to why the same had not been submitted during assessment proceedings. Even otherwise, the Ld. DR stated that considering the statement of the assessee itself that it had sold no machinery during the year and on account of the fact that the assessee had failed to file any evidence to substantiate its claim that the cash deposited in the bank was attributable to the sale of the machinery, the addition on account of unexplained cash deposits had been rightly upheld by the Ld.CIT(Appeals). 10. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of authorities below and had gone through the documents placed before us. With respect to the additional ground raised before us, we are in agreement with the assessee that the said ground is a legal ground challenging the addition made on account of opportunity not being granted to the assessee to rebut the Remand Report made by the Assessing Officer on the submissions made by the assessee during appellate proceedings. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
