Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (4) TMI 1156

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ould not explain the source of cash deposits and credit entries AO has invoked the provision of Section 69A and added the total amount as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. On further appeal before first appellate authority, he has not admitted the appeal of assessee by stating that the appellant has not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Both the authorities below have passed their respective orders without considering the merit of the case, as stated earlier. AR as stated that appellant was engaged in the business of trading of yarn during the year and only the profit element would be liable to tax and not the gross receipt. The appellant should be granted one more o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ave any taxable income in the year under consideration and as such there is no liability to pay advance tax. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.1,96,55,634/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the I.T Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in invoking provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and in thereby taxing entire unexplained money at 60% and levying surcharge at 25% which is not applicable on a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sh deposits and other credit entries from the The Financial Co-Op.Bank by calling information u/s 133(6) of the Act. It was found therefrom that appellant has deposited cash of Rs.25.90 lakh and there were other credit entries of Rs.1,70,65,634/- during the period under consideration. The AO issued final show-cause notice on 21.09.2019, wherein the assessee was asked as to why the order should not be finalized u/s 144 of the Act and why the amount of Rs.1,96,55,634/- (Rs.25,90,000 + Rs.1,70,65,634/-) should not be added as undisclosed income of the appellant. The appellant did not reply to the said show cause notice and hence, AO invoked the provision of Section 69A of the Act and added cash deposit of Rs.25,90,000/- and credit entries of R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Act. The appellant has not also provided any satisfactory explanation / clarification in response to the deficiency letter issued by the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, the Ld.CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal of appellant and dismissed the appeal in limine. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A) the appellant has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, Ld.AR for the appellant has strongly contested the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in not admitting the appeal of appellant. He has argued that the appellant did not have any taxable income in the year under consideration and therefore there was no liability to pay advance tax. He further stated that the appellant is an ordinary person and is not well versed with the income-tax proceedings. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ded the total amount as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. On further appeal before first appellate authority, he has not admitted the appeal of assessee by stating that the appellant has not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per the provisions of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. We further note that both the authorities below have passed their respective orders without considering the merit of the case, as stated earlier. The Ld.AR has stated that appellant was engaged in the business of trading of yarn during the year and only the profit element would be liable to tax and not the gross receipt. Without delving much into the merit of the present case, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant should be granted .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates