Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (12) TMI 1520

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the revision order passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad u/s 263 of the Act for assessment year 2017-18 is erroneous, contrary to law, equity, facts and circumstances of the present case and the materials available on record. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad erred in passing order u/s 263 of the Act when order passed by assessing officer is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 3. It is prayed that order passed by Learned Principal Commissioner may please be quashed. 4. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Taxes (CBDT) to claim the black money deposited in SBN during demonetization period. The whole cash deposit of Rs.15.50 lacs should have been added under Section 68 and charged by applying Section 115BBE of the Act. On the basis of such observation, the ld. Pr. CIT issued show cause notice under Section 263 of the Act. The contents of show cause notice is extracted in para 4 of order of ld. Pr.CIT. The assessee filed its reply through ITBA Portal on 23/03/2022. In reply, the assessee stated that a search action was carried out at the office premises of assessee as well as at the residence of its Director Shri Kamal J Shah on 18/06/2013. During the course of search, a cash of Rs. 15.50 lacs were seized by searched party from the residence of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The assessee furnished required details. The Assessing Officer accepted such contention. The assessee further submitted that Rs. 15.50 lacs are already taxed in the hand of Shri Kamal J Shah in the assessment order for the A.Y. 2014-15 as per stand of the department. Thus, the department cannot hold the view that the cash seized from the assessee company and it was not available with it for depositing in bank, which is contrary to the stand of department that such cash belongs to Shri Kamal J Shah. Thus, the assessment order in case of assessee company is not prejudicial to the interests of revenue. Therefore, the twin condition arse not satisfied in the present case. 3. The ld. Pr. CIT after recording the contents of reply of assessee h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r.CIT. The ld. AR submits that the impugned cash seized on Rs. 15.50 lacs on 19/06/2013 was already added in the hands of Director of assessee in assessment order or A.Y. 2014-15 passed under Section 143(3) dated 28/03/2016. Once such addition was made, the Director accepted such addition and no further appeal was filed despite such addition. The assessee initially made journal entry on 01/04/2016 in assessee company. However, when such amount was added in the hands of Director of assesse, such zonal entry was reversed. Though, there is no reference of examination of such issue by the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order, yet the Assessing officer passed the assessment order after satisfying that such cash seized during sear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... out the cash of Rs. 15.50 lacs. We further find that in reply to show cause notice, the assessee specifically stated that the cash of Rs. 15.50 lacs were of the assessee-company. And the assessee notionally reduced the cash balance by passing accounting entry by crediting cash by Rs. 15.50 lacks and debiting Rs. 15.50 lacks to cash seized in the search on 18.06.2016. We find that the ld. Pr.CIT has not disputed any other amount deposited in the form of SBN except the cash of Rs. 15.50 lacs. We further find that the department has already made addition of Rs. 15.50 lacs in the hands of Director of the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee vehemently submitted that when such amount was added in the hands of Director of the assessee, a reverse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates