9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the books of account as well as the book results. The Ld.CIT(A) has also upheld the findings of the AO without assigning any cogent reason and he also seems to have simply approved the addition without proper appreciation of facts. As also to be noted that on the same set of facts, the AO has accepted the cash deposit of Rs.17 lacs in another proprietorship concern of the assessee namely M/s Wool World but has proceeded to doubt the cash deposited in the proprietorship concern M/s Syna Creations without any cogent reason. We are of considered view that the impugned addition was not called for especially when the assessee s books of account have not been rejected and all the income and expenses and the book results have been accepted except the cash deposit without there being any iota of evidence, which would point out that the assessee had deposited her unaccounted money under the garb of sales or receipts from sister concern M/s Rajan Enterprises. AO has proceeded in a very hasty and an illogical manner without taking a holistic view of the entire case record before him. It is also to be noted that the captioned case was a search case and even during the course of sear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee filed detailed submission and no adverse view was taken by the AO in the case of M/s Wool World but in the case of cash deposited in M/s Syna Creations, as per the AO, the assessee failed to submit any satisfactory reply regarding cash deposited and, therefore, the AO went on to hold that the assessee had introduced her own unaccounted money in the garb of sale during the demonetization period. The AO observed that the assessee was the owner of the money appearing in the bank account and, therefore, the same was chargeable to tax u/s 69A of the Act. The AO also invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and held that tax was imposable @ 60%. The assessment was completed at an income of Rs.20,30,070/-. 2.2 Now the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(A) by raising the following grounds: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana, has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in computing the income at Rs. 20,30,070/- against the returned income of Rs. 10,30,070/-. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana, while confirming the addition of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of deposit of cash in the regular bank a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a legal ground and, therefore, the same should be admitted and adjudicated in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT, reported in (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC). 3.2. The Ld.CIT DR opposed the prayer of admission of additional ground. 3.3. After considering the submissions of both the parties and looking into the nature of ground raised by the assessee, we agree with the contention of the Ld. AR that it is a legal ground which goes into the very root of the matter and, therefore, we admit the same. 4.0 Arguing the additional ground raised by the assessee, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was challenging the assessment on the ground that the mandatory approval given u/s 153D of the Act by the Ld.Addl.CIT had been given without any application of mind and thus the assessment order deserved to be quashed. In this regard, reliance was placed on the order of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of M/s Inder International Vs. ACIT in ITA No.1573/Chd/2018 vide order dated 07.06.2021. 4.1 In response, the Ld.CIT DR submitted that the contention of the Ld. AR regarding mechanical approval was factually ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses with whom major transaction with respect to purchase of cloth had taken place and it was pointed out that the AO had not doubted the veracity of the same. The Ld. AR submitted that, thus, in effect, the AO had made the addition without pointing out any discrepancy in the books of account especially when all the cash entries had been duly incorporated in the regular books of account. 5.1 The Ld. AR also drew our attention to the submissions made before the Ld.CIT(A) wherein the assessee had submitted the details of sales from assessment year 2014-15 to assessment year 2018-19. This chart is reproduced hereinunder for ready reference: Assessment Year Sales 2014-15 56.95 Lacs 2015-16 59.98 Lacs 2016-17 90.39 Lacs 2017-18 97.47 Lacs 2018-19 450.77 Lacs 5.2 It was pointed out that all sales had been accepted in earlier years as well as the immediately succeeding year and that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d cash in the books of account under the garb of job work. The Ld.CIT DR submitted that, therefore, the appeal of the assessee deserved to the dismissed and he also supported the action of the AO in invoking the provisions of se 115BBE of the Act. 7.0 We have heard the rival submissions and have also gone through the records. First we would like to proceed to adjudicate on the merits of the case. In ground Nos.2, 3 and 4, the assessee has challenged the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.10 lacs on account of deposit of cash during the demonetization period. It has been argued by the Ld. AR that the assessee has been regularly maintaining the books of account which are duly audited and all the cash deposits, which the AO has held to be sham transactions, were routed through the books of account maintained by the assessee. It has been further argued by the Ld. AR that no defect in these books of account has been pointed out by the AO and neither these books have been rejected. It has also been argued by the Ld. AR that there is no bar against having financial dealings with sister concerns and, therefore, to reject the contention of the assessee that cash d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
