9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1494X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "1. For that the order passed under section 250 dated 19/06/2023 is wholly illegal and bad in law. 2. For that the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact in upholding addition of Rs. 711000 as unexplained money under section 69A, though out of the cash deposit of Rs. 11591500, sum of the cash deposit of Rs. 1,08,80,500 has been considered as business income and tax @ 8% by the AO but cash deposit during demonetization period has been not considered explained. 3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing a vague and cryptic order as Ld. Cit has uphold the addition of Rs. 711000 as unexplained cash credit though the present case is the addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd 8% of Rs. 1,08,80,500/-, which worked out to Rs. 8,70,440/- was considered as the business income of the assessee and assessed accordingly. 4. None appeared in the course of the hearing before us and the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. Sr. DR. It is noted that the assessee has taken the ground that the cash deposit during the demonetization period has not been considered. We also note that the order of Ld. CIT(A) in upholding the addition is a cryptic one, the operative part of which is as under: "Having considered the appellant's submissions and the facts of the case. I hold the following views: It is found from the submission of the appellant, due to his lack of knowledge about income tax he could not file his re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d deposit; more so when the deposits during the rest of the financial year are being treated as the business income of the assessee. As the Ld. AO found that the assessee was carrying on business and as also appears in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) when in the course of the appeal, the assessee had stated that the business was based on 100% cash transactions and total transactions in the bank account were due to business transactions, therefore, on the principle of consistency and without giving reasons why the specific amount was held to be not pertaining to the business, once the deposits for the rest of the year were being treated as part of the business income, the deposit during the demonetization period could not be excluded and added u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
