9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee that the consistent cash deposits in all the months. AO has not rejected the books of account maintained by the assessee. We are of considered view that in this case AO had not brought on record any concrete evidence to reject the explanation of the appellant. Hence, we delete the addition sustained by the ld.CIT(A). Decided in favour of assessee. - Hon ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member And Hon ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri.N. Arjun Raj, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri. Ashwin D. Gowda, IRS, Addl. CIT. ORDER PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h out of which a sum of Rs. 10,25,500/- was in Specified Bank Note. In the said letter, the bank has further mentioned that a sum of Rs. 41,16,520/- has been deposited during demonetization period in Syndicate Bank, Mulagumoodu Branch. Since assessee did not produce any evidences that the deposit of Rs. 41,16,520/- was not in Specified Bank Note, the Ld. Assessing Officer considered Rs. 41,16,520/- as unexplained cash credits to bank u/s.68 r.w.s.115BBE of the Act and added the same to the returned income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the ld. Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us, the ld. Authorized ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld. Authorized Representative submitted that the appellant trust is running a school in Thiruvattar panchayat, catering to students in that remote village and the only source of income for the appellant is out of the fees collected from those students. The ld. Assessing Officer had not brought on record any concrete findings / evidence to reject the claim of the appellant or to doubt the source of the SBNs deposited. The ld. CIT(A) also without appreciating the documents filed before him had rendered cryptic findings and ultimately had dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. Hence, the ld. Authorized Representative prayed for deleting the addition made by the lower authorities. 5. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative supported the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
