9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are as under: "1) The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs. 35,64,800/- as unexplained cash credit u/s. 69A of the Act which were received as turnover in the business of tours and travels prior to demonetization period as discussed in para 6.9 of the assessment order. 2) The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming application of provisions of section 69A and section 115BBE of the Act though the amount were received as part of sales in the course of running business of tours and travels. 3) The appellant reserves right to add, alter and withdraw any grounds of appeal." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for AY.2017-18 on 30.10.2017, declaring total income of Rs. 17,84,25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant are extracted at pages 2 to 5 of the appellate order. The CIT(A) has also reproduced the assessment order at pages 5 to 13 of the appellate order. The findings of the CIT(A) are at pages 14 to 17 of the appellate order. The ld. AR submitted that there was huge cash on hand on 31.05.2016 for Rs. 31,33,548/-, which decreased and increased in the subsequent months from July, 2016 to October, 2016. The assessee had also deposited huge cash of Rs. 1,01,43,050/- in the bank account in Oct, 2016 before the demonetization period. The assessee had received cash of Rs. 46,42,878/- in the first week of November, 2016 due to high bookings in the pre-Diwali period. The CIT(A) observed that the burden was on the assessee to establish the source o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of travel agent and tour operator in the name of M/s Kashish Holidays. The very nature of business is such that assessee used to receipt cash clients for various tours and vacations. The ld. AR submitted that even in group tour, cash is collected by main person of the group and deposited for further payment to different agencies. He, therefore, argued that it is quite obvious to hold cash on hand at any point of time, more particularly prior to Diwali. The ld. AR submitted that many people gave advances in cash because major tours are around Diwali period. This is the main reason for substantial amount of cash on hand. The ld. AR submitted that the appellant had f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s ought not to be taxed as income; rather profit embedded in such cash sales ought to be taxed to avoid possible leakage of income. He relied on the following decisions: (i) Amrita Gem (P) Ltd vs. ITO (ITA No. 181/SRT/2023) and (ii) Kediam Gem (P.) Ltd. vs. ITO (ITA No. 756/SRT/2023). 6. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) of the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. He submitted that the AO has added the cash deposited during the demonetization period because assessee could not satisfactorily explain the nature and source of the said deposit. He further stated that the SBN notes were deposited on different dates and not on a single day. He argued that the order of lower authorities ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s strongly argued against separate addition of the cash deposit during demonetization period. We are not fully convinced about the argument of the ld. AR. The assessee is engaged in the business of travel agent and tour operator but he has deposited the SBN on different dates from 10.11.2016 to 12.11.2016 as tabulated at page 7 and 8 of the assessment order. If the assessee had the old SBN before demonetization period, he would have deposited the same on a single day and not on different dates. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has not given details of the depositors of the impugned cash during demonetization period. He has not correlated the deposit with bookings of tickets/hotels etc. There is no one-to-one nexus between the depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd (iv) Dagina Jewellers (ITA No.30/SRT/2022). 10. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. 11. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also deliberated upon the case laws relied upon by the ld. AR. The provisions of section 115BBE of the Act was enacted on 15.12.2016 and hence cannot be applied for the year under consideration. The ld. AR has relied on various decisions which are placed in the paper book. We find that the Division Bench of this Tribunal in cases of Samir Shantilal Mehta vs. ACIT, in ITA No.42/SRT/2022, Arjunsinh Harisinih Thakor vs. ITO, in ITA No. 245/SRT/2021, Jitendra Nemichand Gupta vs. ITO, in ITA No.211/SRT/2021 and Sanjaybh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
