TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erusal of the assessee s balance sheet Thus we have a strong conviction that now when the bank accounts in question, had both duly been accounted for by the assessee in its books of account for the year under consideration, therefore, the A.O by not rejecting the said books of account had clearly accepted that the cash deposited by the assessee firm during the year under consideration in the said bank accounts was out of its disclosed sources. As the treating of the cash deposits an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act by the A.O in itself militates against the acceptance of the book results of the assessee by him, therefore, there can be no justification in upholding the addition so made by him. We vacate the addition made by the A.O u/s.68 - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.123/RPR/2022 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2022 - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Prabhu Das Patel, CA For the Revenue : Shri G.N Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 12. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the documents, bills/vouchers, registers in support of his claim that the cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lacs (supra) were sourced out of its cold storage rental receipts, but the assessee failed to furnish the requisite details. Considering the aforesaid facts, the A.O observed that not only the assessee had failed to substantiate that the cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lacs (supra) in question were made in the normal course of its business out of the cold storage rental receipts, but even otherwise the said cash deposits made in the bank accounts during the demonetization period were found to be abnormally high as in comparison to those made in the preceding period. It was observed by the A.O that unlike the substantial cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lac (supra) made during the demonetization period the assessee had made cash deposits of only of Rs.14.47 lacs (approx.) during the pre-demonetization period falling in the year under consideration. Apart from that, it was noticed by the A.O that the assessee had only made a cash deposit of Rs. 50,000/- in the immediately preceding year, i.e, A.Y.2016-17. Also, it was observed by the A.O that after the demonetization period the assessee had ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich alongwith bills/vouchers were available for verification. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the A.O had only as on 15.12.2019 (i.e Sunday) at 4:12 p.m called upon the assessee to furnish the aforesaid details on 16.12.2019 by 12:00 p.m, and thereafter, without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee to furnish the requisite details, therein, framed the assessment vide his order passed on 16.12.209 (at 4:28 p.m). The Ld. A.R in order to fortify his aforesaid contention drew our attention to the submissions that were filed by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals) [Page 5-8 of CIT(A) order] wherein the aforesaid facts were mentioned. It was, thus, the claim of the ld. A.R that as the assessee was not afforded sufficient opportunity by the A.O who had hushed through the assessment proceedings, therefore, the aforesaid documents could not be filed before him. It was further submitted by the ld. A.R that the aforesaid documents, viz. (i). letters dated 18.08.2019, 12.12.2019 filed with the A.O; (ii). cash book (compressed); (iii). details of cold storage rent received during the year etc., were uploaded by the assessee in the course of the proceedings before the first appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation period was sourced out of its duly accounted cold storage rent receipts. As observed by me hereinabove, though the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings had claimed that the amount of Rs.46.55 lacs (supra) was deposited out of the cash in hand which was available with it out of its cold storage rentals received in the normal course of its business of running a cold storage, however, the A.O had rejected the said claim, for the reason that the assessee could not substantiate the same on the basis of any supporting documentary evidence. Accordingly, the A.O had held the amount of Rs.46.55 lac (supra) as an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. The A.O while concluding as hereinabove, had also drawn support from the fact that the cash deposits made by the assessee in its bank accounts in the immediately preceding year, as well as those made during the post demonetization period, were substantially lower than those made during the demonetization period. It was observed by the A.O that as against the cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lacs (supra) made by the assessee during the demonetization period the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.14.47 lac during the pre-dem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the aforesaid facts, I am unable to comprehend that now when the assessee s explanation that the cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lac (supra) were sourced out of its duly accounted cold storage rent receipts was not accepted by the A.O, then, on what basis he had accepted its book results and framed the assessment. In case, the view taken by the A.O is approved, then the same would lead to an incongruous situation, wherein the A.O while framing assessment had rejected the assessee s claim that the cash deposits of Rs.46.55 lacs (supra) in its duly accounted bank accounts was made out of the cash in hand as was available with it out of the cold storage rent receipts, but to the contrary, while framing the assessment had simultaneously subscribed to its claim by accepting the disclosed cold storage rent receipts out of which the cash deposits in question were claimed by the assesee to have been sourced. The A.O could not be allowed to blow hot and cold at the same time. If the assessee s claim that the cash deposits in question were made out of its duly disclosed cold storage rent receipts was not to be accepted, then, the A.O was obligated to have rejected the books of account of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
