9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mply says that the cash in hand is excessive and therefore, estimated 40% of the cash in hand as an income and subsequently, partial relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) and when the assessee is explaining in detail without considering the same estimation made by the A.O without giving any reasons, in my opinion, it is not correct. Even, the Ld. CIT(A) has granted partial relief without giving any reasons why entire addition cannot be deleted. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) also failed to consider the explanation of the assessee. In view of the above, the addition made by the A.O cannot be survived. Accordingly, the addition made by the A.O is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA Nos. 3463 & 3464/Chny/2019 - - - Dated:- 24-11-2021 - SHR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Assessing Officer (AO) after following the due procedure, completed the assessment for assessing the total income of the assessee is at ₹ 26,35,570/-. In the assessment year, the A.O has noted that an amount of ₹ 46,83,225/- has shown as cash in hand in his business concern and ₹ 41,33,661/- has been shown as cash in hand in his wife s business concern, totaling to ₹ 88,16,916/- shown as cash in hand in his and his wife s business concern. The reasons for the same were not explained with documentary proof. Accordingly, the A.O has disallowed 40% of the cash in hand shown in the return of income after giving credit to the closing balance of ₹ 58,003/-. 6. On appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the books. The sundry creditors for goods was about Rs, 40 lakhs which go to show that the stile consideration was not used to discharge the creditor's liability but kept as cash. The appellant thus explained the ash availability as per books and the AO is not justified in doubting the same without any basis or material. Such estimated addition cannot he made especially on the cash balance available which cannot at all be treated as income especially when the cash balance is as per audited books of accounts. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the above explanation of the assessee, he has deleted the addition to the extent of 50% and sustained the addition of ₹ 7,87,500/-. 8. On appeal before the Tribunal, the ld. coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ointed out any defect in the books of accounts and only says that the cash in hand shown by the assessee is excessive. I find that the A.O without any basis, simply says that the cash in hand is excessive and therefore, estimated 40% of the cash in hand as an income and subsequently, partial relief granted by the Ld. CIT(A) and when the assessee is explaining in detail without considering the same estimation made by the A.O without giving any reasons, in my opinion, it is not correct. Even, the Ld. CIT(A) has granted partial relief without giving any reasons why entire addition cannot be deleted. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) also failed to consider the explanation of the assessee. In view of the above, the addition made by the A.O cannot be surv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
