9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 210X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee cannot be said to be unreasonable and is a plausible explanation. We do not see any reason to reject the explanation of the assessee. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) ought not to have rejected the explanation of the assessee. We direct the AO to delete the addition made on account of cash deposits. Thus, the ground of appeal no.1 stands allowed. Addition on account of cost of improvement - HELD THAT:- We find that the appellant had failed to produce any evidence in support of the cost of improvement. Accordingly, we confirmed the addition. Thus, the ground of appeal no.2 stands dismissed. - ITA No.195/PUN/2022 - - - Dated:- 1-3-2023 - Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member And ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- was received on sale of property. The appellant also filed the bank statement of his father, Shri Balwant Singh Bakshi held in Punjab and Sind Bank, Dehradun and filed the confirmation from his father. Considering this evidence, the ld. CIT(A) rejected the explanation of receipt of cash from father of the appellant in the absence of any nexus. However, the ld. CIT(A) accepted the explanation of the appellant in respect of Rs.3,00,000/- cash received from his father and benefit of Rs.2,00,000/- out of cash withdrawn of Rs.7,00,000/- and confirmed the balance addition of Rs.15,00,000/-. As regards to the addition under the head capital gains , the appellant had filed the statement of computation of short term capital gains in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r delay. 6. Having regard to the explanation given by the assessee for condonation of delay, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. Now, we proceed to dispose of the appeal. 7. When the matter was called on, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. 8. We heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the material on record. Ground of appeal no.1 challenges the addition on account of cash deposits of Rs.15,00,000/- as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). We had carefully gone through the explanation tendered by the appellant during the course of proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), which is extracted by the ld. CIT(A) in para 5 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
