9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cessary, on the basis of submissions to be made at the time of hearing." 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed her return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 16/03/2018 declaring income of Rs. 9,95,440/-. In the computation of income, the assessee has shown profit from business under Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) of Rs.9,94,282/- and other sources of Rs. 11,162/-. The return of income was selected for scrutiny. During the assessment, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has made cash deposit during demonetization period in her bank account in The Surat Peoples Cooperative Bank Ltd. of Rs. 10.90 lacs. During the assessment, the assessee was asked to substantiate cash deposit during demonetization period. The Assessing Officer in para 3 of assessment order recorded that the assessee furnished only copy of cash flow statement showing cash in hand of Rs. 13,84,872/-as on 01/04/2016. The Assessing Officer issued final show cause notice dated 04/12/2019 asking the assessee to furnish source of cash in hand of Rs. 13,84,872/- alongwith documentary evidence, contra confirmation and purchases made by assessee and also me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orded in para 4 of order of ld. CIT(A). The assessee in his submission submitted that he has deposited SBN in bank account with The Surat People's Cooperative Bank of Rs. 10.90 lacs between 09/11/2016 to 30/12/2016, the assessee categorically stated during the assessment that these SBN were deposited out of opening cash balance as on 01/04/2016 of Rs. 13,84,827/- and receipt of embroidery income during the current year up to 08/11/2016 of Rs. 5,34,900/-. The assessee has cash balance of Rs. 16,98,668/- as on 30/12/2016 as per cash book furnished with Income tax Department. The Assessing Officer disregarded the submission of assessee and made addition of Rs. 10,90,000/-. The assessee during the assessment, received various show cause notices, all such notices were duly replied. The assessee further stated that language of Section 69A provides that where in any financial year, the assessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and such money and such money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article is not recorded in the books of account, if any maintained by him for any source of income and assessee offers no explanation about the nat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss. The assessee declared that she does not maintain any books of account but realized on the cash book and cash flow statement. The assessee failed to produce the source of cash deposit either before the Assessing Officer or before him. The case laws relied by assessee are not applicable on the facts of her case. The ld. CIT(A) on such observation, upheld the addition made by Assessing Officer. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal. 5. I have heard the submission of the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee and the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue and have perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 10,90,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposit. The Assessing Officer failed to appreciate the opening cash balance with assessee as on 31/03/2016 of Rs. 13,84,827/- . The assessee was working as a sole proprietor and earing income by doing embroidery job work. For the said assessment year, the assessee has shown a good profit and declared income of approximately rs. 10.00 lacs (Rs. 9.95 la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1474 of 2009 (Guj) On the submission that the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act is not retrospective, the ld. AR of the assessee has relied on the following case laws: (11) Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. Vs State of Kerela (1966) 60 ITR 262 (SC) (12) CIT Vs Vatika Township (P) Ltd. (2014) 367 ITR 466 (SC) (13) Sedco Forex International Drill Ltd. Vs CIT (2005) 279 ITR 310 (SC) (14) Avani Exports Vs CIT (2012) 23 taxmann.com 62 (Guj) (15) CIT Vs S.A. Wahab (1990) 48 Taxman 362 (Ker) (16) Samir Shantilal Mehta Vs ACIT ITA No. 42/Srt/2022 (Surat Trib) (17) Arjunsinh Harisinh Thakor Vs ITO ITA No. 245/Srt/2021 (Surat Trib) (18) Jitendra Nemichand Gupta Vs ITO ITA No. 211/Srt/2021 (Surat Trib) (19) DCIT Vs Punjab retail Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 677/Ind/2019 (Indore Trib) (20) ACIT Vs Sandesh Kumar Jain ITA No. 41/Jab/2020 (Jabalpur Trib) 6. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee has not filed any document before the Tribunal to substantiate alleged business activities. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that he fully supports the order of ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
