TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to CIT(A) ] dated 08.12.2022 for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Ld. CIT(A) has decided appeal with a closed mind without considering facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Ld. CIT(A) has erred to disbelieve the confirmation of Appellants client, Mr. Sagun Naik having deposited cash of Rs. 6,00,000/- with Appellant for his matter in Supreme Court. 3. Ld. CIT(A) cannot demand explanation of source of the amount received from Mr. Sagun Naik. 4. Ld. CIT(A) has disbelieved receipt of Rs. 16,90,000/- during July, 2018 in comparison to total receipts of Rs. 50,40,000/- during FY 2018-19 only on the basis of surmises. 5. Ld. CIT(A) has erred to disbelieve the possession of Cash of Rs. 16,00,000/- in July 2018 in cash summary raised objections of not transferring it digitally only due to assumptions and surmises. 6. Appellant s explanation for possessing cash and evidences in support of attending matters in Supreme Court have been ignored and glossed over without considering the merit in the case. 7. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. Before the Assessing Officer the assessee filed the confirmation letter from Mr. Sugan Naik. The assessee also filed statement of clients register with details of fees paid by them during the year under consideration. The assessee also filed statement of profession fee received from Shri Biren Limbachiya and also the statement of cash withdrawals. The assessing officer after considering the various details filed by the assessee held that:- 7.19 Regarding the confirmation letter stating that Shri Sagun Naik had given a cash of Rs. 6,00,000 from 03.04.2018 to 15.07.2018 to the assessee, on various dates, it is stated that there is no justification as to why Shri Sagun Naik had given such a big amount of cash of Rs. 5,10,000 to the assessee in the month of July, 2018. However, no details regarding the income of Shri Sagun Naik, his ITR, cash in hand available as on date have been filed. It is also stated that under the normal circumstances, the assesse had admitted that the cash received by him as professional fees is deposited in the bank account immediately, either on the same day or the day after. There is no logic in keeping the cash received by the assessee till 16.07.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts, it is clear that the assessee is found to be the owner of money of Rs. 16,00,000 which has not been recorded in the books of accounts and that the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory and hence the cash carried by the assessee is unexplained and is therefore added u/s 69 A of the Act as Unexplained Money. 5. Aggrieved the assessee filed further appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition stated that the statement of the assessee is dissatisfactory as in this return digital world no one would transact such a huge amount in cash when the transaction of funds through banking channel is very easy Smooth and time saving. 6. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The ld. AR submitted that with regard to amount received from Shri Sagun Naik the assessee has given the date wise breakup of receipt of fees in cash which would tie up with the cash book and the ledger accounts of professional fees. The ld. AR further submitted that Mr. Sagun Naik has confirmed having made this payment and the same along with his PAN Number and other details were already submitted before the lower authorities. With regard to amount r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Total 5,75,000 Fees from Mr.Biren Limbachiya Date Cheque receipt 10-Apr-18 2,00,000 13-Apr-18 2,00,000 16-Apr-18 2,00,000 18-Apr-18 2,00,000 19-Apr-18 2,00,000 26-Apr-18 2,00,000 26-Apr-18 2,00,000 26-Apr-18 2,00,000 26-Apr-18 1,00,000 Total 17,00,000 10. On perusal of the ledger account of the professional fees (page 68 to 76 of paper book), we notice that the above amounts have been accounted in the ledger as income. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR submitted that the cash book is not reliable and drew our attention to certain pages in the cash book (page 57 of the paper book) where while recording the transactions on 02.07.2018 it is mentioned as professional fee received in cash deposited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
