9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng officer or investigating the facts independently. Thus addition made by assessing officer and sustained by CIT(A) is not justified. Ground No. 1 of the appeal is allowed - SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Assessee represented : Shri Deven Kapadia, CA and Ms. Resha Chaliawala, A.R. For the Department represented : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Order PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 11/03/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT (A) has erred both in law and on the facts in confirming the action of the Ld. AO by making high pitch addition of Rs. 13,74,000/- on account of cash deposit made during the demonetization period (08.11.2016 to 30.12.2016) and thereby raised demand of Rs. 14,12,441/- without considering the submission made by the appellant and rejecting the explanation and requisite documents already submitted by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delay in filing appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate for the reasons that the representative who was engaged by the assessee has gone to USA and informed the assessee only in the month of November 2022. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity is provided to contest the appeal on merit and on the other hand, the revenue will not suffer any prejudice if the appeal of assessee is decided on merit. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld.Sr. DR) for the revenue submits that the assessee has not shown reasonable and plausible explanation, therefore, delay in filing of appeal may not be condoned. 4. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and find that there is no intentional and deliberate delay on the part of assessee rather the assessee has engaged Abhishek Bipinbhai Naik CA to conduct his case before the First Appellate Authority, who has not informed the assessee in time. I find that the assessee is not going to be benefited in filing appeal belatedly, therefore, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the delay in filing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tated that TDS was deducted under Section 194J of the Act and the copy of such TDS were furnished. The Assessing Officer accepted that TDS deducted under Section 194H of Rs. 1,78,673/-, thus the Assessing Officer was aware about the business activities of assessee. No notice or summon under Section 131 or 136 of the were issued for calling information from Interactive Financial Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. and Flight Raja Travels Pvt. Ltd. On the applicability of Section 69A of the Act, the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer made addition under Section 69A in respect of cash deposit during demonetization period. Section 69A of the Act is not applicable in case of assessee as cash collected by assessee during the year and particularly during demonetization period was self- explanatory and does not require any further clarification because necessary evidence is like bank statement, return of income, 26AS statement were in possession of Assessing Officer. All such evidences were ignored. The assessee reiterated that the bank deposits were immediately transferred to Interactive Financial Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. and Flight Raja Travels Pvt. Ltd. through RTGS/NEFT, so the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt with Flight Raja Travels Pvt. Ltd. is also filed. The assessee was distributor and used to act as a commission agent for promotion, marketing and distribution of various cash products. As per the policy of such companies, it uses to give balance in distributor s code and distributor further distributes the same into valet of retail distributors. The assessee used to deposit daily cash collected from retailers, who were working under the assessee and used to deposit the same in the bank account which was transmitted into bank of Interactive Financial Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. and Flight Raja Travels Pvt. Ltd. through RTGS/NEFT which is evident from the bank statement. All the deposits are the sale proceed of distributorship. Copy of bank account of Varachha Co-operative bank Ltd. and copy of bank account of Bank of Maharashtra is placed on record. The ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated all such fact and evidence nor any remand report was called from the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer wrongly taxed the deposits under Section 115BBE of the Act. The deposits in bank accounts were in fact part and parcel of business or transaction. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
