9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e persons as compared to earlier histories will also give some indication for suspicion. Non-availability of stock or attempts to inflate stock by introducing fictitious purchases is also some indication for suspicion of fictitious sales. Transfer of deposit of cash to another account or entity, which is not in line with the earlier history. Therefore, it is important to examine whether the case of the assessee falls into any of the above parameters are not. Assessee is directed to establish all relevant details to substantiate its claim in line with the above applicable instructions. We are aware of the fact that not every deposit during the demonetisation period would fall under category of unaccounted cash. Burden is on the assessee to establish the genuineness of the deposit in order to fall outside the scope of unaccounted cash. AO shall verify all the details / evidences filed by the assessee based on the above direction and to consider the claim in accordance with law. We direct the AO to verify the cash deposited in the light of the above circular by granting proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statisti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, and the learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in not considering and deciding this ground. The levy of taxes at special rates u/s 115BBE of the Act being erroneous is to be deleted. 7. The appellant denies to pay interest u/s 234B C of the IT Act, 1961. As the interest so levied being erroneous has to be deleted. 8. In view of the above and other grounds to be adduced at the time of hearing, it is requested that the treatment of Rs. 43,19,100/- as unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the Act, be deleted, it be also held that provisions of section 115BBE of the Act, are not applicable to the facts of the case and interest levied u/s. 234B and 234C be also deleted. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2.1 Assessee is a partnership firm and is carrying on the business of retail trade in gold jewellery. For year under consideration it filed its return of income on 25.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.62,23,150/-. The assessee has also maintained regular books of accounts that is subjected under audit u/s. 44AB of the Act. For the year under consideration, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for following reasons: High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) who confirmed the addition made in the assessment. 2.4 Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The Ld.AR before us vehemently argued that the sales are accepted and the quantity tallies. There is no dispute with the department that the source of cash deposits are due to cash sales though admittedly during the demonetisation period. She submitted that assessee cannot be put to such addition based on any surmises and conjectures. 4. On the contrary, the Ld.DR objected the argument advanced by the Ld.AR. The Ld.DR submitted that there is no acceptance by the Ld.AO regarding any sales and quantity being tallied. Infact the authorities are doubting the genuineness of the cash deposited to the extent of Rs.43,19,100/- for the reason that it is not supported by any PAN details. He submitted that the conclusion of the Ld.AO in the assessment order is pertinent which is reproduced as under: As per point no. 3 noted above, no conclusive finding can be drawn as to the source of the cash. It can either be (a) the assessee's untaxed moneys lying with him which was introduced in the books as cash sales or ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... violation of natural justice in respect of not properly verifying the details filed by the assessee by the authorities below. Considering the fact that, in any event, the issue would have to be remanded to the Ld.AO in order to verify the cash deposit of Rs.43,19,100/- in specified bank notes during the demonetisation period in its bank account in accordance with various instructions referred to by the Ld.DR hereinabove. 7. Admittedly, the assessee accepted the SBNs which were no longer a legal tender and were to be explained in accordance with the relevant circular mentioned hereinabove. These instructions gives a hint regarding what kind of investigation, enquiry, evidences that the assessing officer is required to take into consideration for the purpose of assessing such cases. 8. In 1 of such instructions dated 09/08/2019 speaks about the comparative analysis of cash deposits, cash sales, month wise cash sales and cash deposits. It also provides that whether in such cases the books of accounts have been rejected or not where substantial evidences of vide variation be found between these statistical analyses. Therefore, it is very important to note that whether the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
