9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned. CIT(A) not pointed out any reason for rejecting the contents of the affidavit of the father of the assessee submitted by the assessee in support of his claim. CIT(A) has not pointed out any clinching evidence on record to justify his action. In our considered view, the addition of 50% of the cash deposited based on assumption and presumption is not sustainable in law. We accordingly set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to deleted the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NO. 108/Chd/2020 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) - - - Dated:- 7-6-2021 - SHRI. N.K.SAINI, VP AND SHRI , R.L. NEGI, JM Assessee by: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue by: Smt. Mee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 475/- on account of bank interest. 3. The Assessee challenged the assessment order passed by the A.O. before the Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee furnished additional evidence. Ld. The Ld. CIT(A) after taking into consideration additional evidence submitted before him and hearing the assessee, partly allowed the appeal and deleted the addition on account of credit entries amounting to 1,60,000/- and 2,00,000/- and further reduced the addition made as unexplained deposit amounting to ₹ 14,00,500/- to 50%. Still aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. The assessee has challenged the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the following grounds: 1. The Worthy CIT (A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the same has not been given in the order. 6. The Worthy CIT (A) while rejecting the claim of the assessee has accepted the fact that the assessee has no other source of income except the agriculture. Therefore, the nature of the entire disputed income is agricultural in nature and is exempt from tax. 7. Initiation of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is also not warranted due to the fact that nothing has been concealed. Therefore, it is prayed that very initiation of this penalty proceedings be ordered to be dropped. 5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the settled principle of law. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee received an amount of ͅ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set aside., 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supporting the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), submitted that the assessee failed to explain the cash credit in question to the satisfaction of the AO, therefore the AO treated the total amount deposed in the bank account of the assessee as unexplained income of the assessee. However, since the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition to the extent of the amount transferred from the bank account and further restricted the addition to 50% of the total amount of cash deposited, there is no merit in the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, no further action is required in this case. 7. We have heard the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material available on the record. The only grieva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es. In our considered view, actual income per acre cannot be determined on the basis of only girdawari details. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) has not rebutted the contention of the assessee that estimated income of ₹ 25,000/- per acre rate was the rate of lease of land for agriculture purposes in the year under consideration. Moreover, the Ld. CIT(A) has observed that the department has not been able to establish the possible source of cash generated. We further notice that the estimation of income @ 25,000/- per acre by the Ld. CIT(A) is not based on evidence on record or report of the authority concerned. The Ld. CIT(A) not pointed out any reason for rejecting the contents of the affidavit of the father of the assessee submitted by the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
