ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR V. BHAGWAN DAS AND SONS, UDAIPUR

ITA 378/JODH/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2775 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH POKHARNA
• Assessee Lawyers: NIDHI NAIR
• Keywords: Cancellation of registration
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 139(1); 43; 22; 133(6); 13; 69A; 20

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR. BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JJUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 ITO, Ward-2(1), Udaipur [PAN: AAEFB 5256 B] (Appellant) Vs. Bhagwan Das and Sons, M/s Bhagwan Das & Sons, 151, Mandi Yard, Udaipur (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Yogesh Pokharna, CA Respondent by Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 31.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement 05.03.2024 ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is preferred by the revenue, which is arising out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 21.08.2023 [here in after ‘NFAC’ ] for assessment year 2017-18 which in turn arise from the order dated 20.12.2019 passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, by ITO, Ward-1(1), Udaipur. 2. In this appeal, the revenue has raised following grounds: - I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2 “Whether on the facts and circumstances the ld. CIT(A), NeFAC, Delhi was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 79,54,400 made by AO on account of unexplained money u/s 69A.” 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that as per information available on record, the assessee has deposited cash in old currency amounting to Rs. 1,55,33,800/- in its bank account No. 786111318000212 maintained with the Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Krishi Mandi, Udaipur during the period of demonetization 9.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 financial year 2016-17 relevant to assessment year 2017-18. As per provisions of section 139(1) of the IT. Act, the assessee was required to file its return of income on or before 30.09.2017. But no return was filed by the assessee within the prescribed time limit. Therefore, a notice under section 142(1) of the IT. Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee on 23.12.2017 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Udaipur and served. The notice under section 142(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was sent by speed post on 30.12.2017 and served. But the assessee opted not to file any return of income in response to notice under section 142(1) of the IT. Act, 1961. The assessee failed to make the return required under section 139(1) of the IT. Act, 1961 and has not filed a return. The assessee also failed to comply with the notice issued under section 142(1) of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, assessment is to be completed under section 144 of the IT. Act, 1961. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3 3.1 Before completing the assessment, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 18.6.2019 and sent by speed post on 19.6.2019 and served. During the demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued by the AO on 23.12.2017 and 30.12.2017 which was send by speed post and served. The AO issued show cause notice dated 18.06.2019 proposing to make addition of Rs. 1,55,33,800/- on account of cash deposited into bank account. On 24.06.2019 the assessee submitted a letter stating that M/s. Bhagwan Das & Sons is a proprietorship firm since A. Y. 2013-14, proprietor Smt. Kanta Devi Nagda (PAN AASPN3795R) Before A. Y. 2013-14 it was a partnership firm having partners Smt. Kanta Devi Nagda; Shri Prem Shakar Nagda and Shri Loesh Nagda. The partnership firm was having bank account at The Udiapur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. Account no. 786111218000212 and the PAN registered at bank was of Partnership firm i.e. AAEFB5256B. After conversion of partnership firm into proprietorship firm in A. Y. 2013-14 the PAN details were not updated by bank. It is also submitted that two accounts were identified under PAN AAEFB5256B i.e. 212 and 786111218000212. These two accounts are not two but is a single account in bank with account no. 786111218000212 and total amount deposited in this account from I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 was Rs. 75,49,400/- in which SBN and new denomination, both currency are included that too of proprietorship concern and partnership firm. But the fact is that the PAN number on above bank account did not get updated after conversion of partnership firm into proprietorship firm. All necessary documents from bank are submitted which stated that above mentioned account number belonged to the proprietor Smt. Kanta Devi Nagda. 3.2 The assessee vide letter dated 05.12.2019 was asked to furnish copy of deed of dissolution of the firm M/s. Bhagwan Das & Sons. The assessee vide letter dated 12.12.2019 submitted that the partnership firm M/s. Bhagwan Das & Sons was dissolved in the year 2012-13, that is 7 years back. Dissolution deed as required by the ld. AO was not submitted as it was not traceable due to the reason that it might be given at the time when TIN no. under VAT was surrendered of Partnership firm or at time when it was given to the bank for conversion of account number of partnership into proprietorship firm. 3.3 Based on these set of facts the ld. AO noted that the assessee failed to file return of income in compliance to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act 23.12.2017. The assessee failed to file the copy of dissolution deed I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 5 of the firm. The assessee failed to explain the source of cash deposited into the bank account no. 786111218000212 maintained with The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Limited., Udaipur. Therefore, cash deposited into the bank account of the assessee treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act for an amount of Rs. 79,54,400/- and the assessment was completed as per provision of section 144 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved from the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Apropos to the grounds so raised by the assessee, the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: “I have considered the assessment order, grounds of appeal, submission of the appellant and material on record. All the grounds of appeal revolve around the single issue of addition of Rs.79,54,400/- made by the AO u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. It has been contended that the appellant firm "Bhagwan Das and Sons" was dissolved in the year 2012 and the business was further carried on by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda in her individual capacity in the same name viz. "Bhagwan Das and Sons". Thus, the appellant firm is not existent during the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2017 - 18 . The appellant explained the issue before the AO, however, could not provide the copy of the dissolution deed as the same was executed nearly 7 years back and was untraceable. The AO made the additions for the reasons that the appellant failed to provide the copy of the dissolution deed and also failed to explain the sources of cash deposits. In all, there was confusion regarding the account nos. 212 and 786111318000212 held in The Udaipur Urban Co- operative Bank Ltd, Krishi Mandi, Udaipur. The account was operated by the appellant firm when it was in existence and the same was continued by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of "Bhagwan Das and Sons". The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd vide letter dated 31.01.2018 has clarified that both these accounts are one and the same and belongs to "Bhagwan Das and Sons" with PAN - AASPN3795R. The copy of the letter is scanned and placed below for the sake of clarity. X X X X X X I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 6 4.1 In another letter dated 20.06.2019, the Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd has clarified that appellant firm viz. Bhagawan Das and Sons” was maintaining account in their bank. The partnership firm was dissolved in the year 2012 and the same account was continued by the proprietor having PAN- AASPN3795R who also continued the business. The copy of the letter is scanned and placed below for the sake of clarity. X X X X X 4.2 The appellant provided the copy of the return of income of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of “Bhagwan Das and Sons” having PAN- AASPN3795R. In the said return of income, there is specific mention regarding the cash deposit of Rs. 77,99,400/- in the bank account no. 212. X X X X X 4.3 Regarding IFSC code YESB0UUCB08, it has been submitted that the bank was not having its own IFSC code in that year and therefore Yes Bank code was used during that period however, the account is actually held in The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd whose abbreviation is UUCB which having place in the IFSC code. 4.4 The appellant has also provided the copy of assessment order in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of "Bhagwan Das and Sons having PAN - AASPN3795R for the A.Y. 2017-18 assessed u/s 147 r.w.s. 1448 of the Act on 23.05.2023 wherein the issue of cash deposit of Rs. 76,54,400/- was the material issue and the AO has accepted that the deposits in the bank accounts maintained by assessee are nothing but cash sales and no addition was made. 4.5 Considering the overall discussion made above, it is apparent that- i. The appellant firm having PAN-AAEFB5256B was dissolved in the year 2012. II. The business of the appellant firm was taken over and carried out by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda having PAN-AASPN3795R in the same name after dissolution of the appellant firm. III. The bank account held by the appellant firm was continued by the proprietor. iv. The issue of cash deposit of Rs. 76,54,400/- was considered in the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 23.05.2023 for the A.Y. 2017-18 in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda having PAN- AASPN3795R. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 7 4.6 In view of the above facts, no addition is warranted in the case of the appellant firm and therefore, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs. 76,54,400/- made u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly the all the grounds raised by the appellant are allowed.” 5. Feeling dissatisfied with the above finding of the ld. CIT(A) the revenue has preferred the present appeal challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A), taking only one ground that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 79,54,400/- made by the ld. AO as unexplained money of the assessee. 6. In support of the grounds so raised the ld. DR is heard who has relied on the findings of the assessing officer and submitted that the assessee has not submitted any documents that the partnership firm has been dissolved and there is no dissolution deed placed on record. Based on that arguments she supported the order of the ld. AO. 7. Per contra, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the finding of the ld. CIT(A) who has in appreciation of the facts has considered the appeal of the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee also filed a written submission in support of the order of the ld. CIT(A): 1. Respondent Bhagwan Das & Sons is a partnership firm which was dissolved on 01/04/2012. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 8 2. Ld. AO issued notice u/s 142(1) on 23.12.2017 to file return of income in view of large deposit of cash amounting to Rs 1,55,33,800/- during demonetization in bank Account 786111318000212 maintained with Udaipur Urban Cooperative Bank Limited. Due to non-receipt of response, another notice was issued on 30.12.2017, and in view of non-compliance another show cause notice for completion of assessment under section 144 is issued on 19 th June 2019. In response to this notice respondent submitted that : a) Aforesaid Partnership Firm was dissolved on 01.04.2012. b) A Bank Certificate from Bank that Bank Account no 786111318000212 is operated by Partnership Firm before 01.04.2012 and after 01.04.2012 is operated by Smt Kanta Devi Nagda as sole Proprietor (with the name & style i.e. Bhagwan Das & Sons), though by mistake of bank PAN No Partnership Firm remain linked with this Account. Bank also informed that PAN No Smt Kanta Devi Nagda is AASPN3795R . c) Bank also informed that aforesaid partnership firm was dissolved. 3. That Ld. AO, completed assessment under sec 144 disregarding all these evidences with addition of Rs 79,54,400/- u/s 69A treating the same as unexplained deposit as the respondent could not submit copy of dissolution deed. 4. That being aggrieved by this addition, appeal before CIT Appeal was filed. The Honourable CIT ‘A’ NFAC deleted aforesaid addition with following observation: “Para 4- I have considered the assessment order, grounds of appeal, submission of the appellant and material on record. All the grounds of appeal revolve around the single issue of addition of Rs.79,54,400/- made by the AO u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. It has been contended that the appellant firm “ Bhagwan Das and Sons” was dissolved in the year 2012 and the business was further carried on by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda in her individual capacity in the same name viz. “Bhagwan Das and Sons”. Thus, the appellant firm is not existent during the year under consideration i.e. A.Y. 2017-18. The appellant explained the issue before the AO, however, could not provide the copy of the dissolution deed as the same was executed nearly 7 years back and was untraceable. The AO made the additions for the reasons that the appellant failed to provide the copy of the dissolution deed and also failed to explain the sources of cash deposits. In all, there was confusion regarding the account nos. 212 and 786111318000212 held in The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd, Krishi Mandi, Udaipur. The account was operated by the appellant firm when it was in existence and the same was continued by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of “Bhagwan Das and Sons”. The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd vide letter dated 31.01.2018 has clarified that both these accounts are one and the same and belongs to “Bhagwan Das and Sons” with PAN - AASPN3795R. The copy of the letter is scanned and placed below for the sake of clarity. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 9 Para 4.1 In another letter dated 20.06.2019, The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd has clarified that appellant firm viz. “Bhagwan Das and Sons” was maintaining account in their bank. The partnership firm was dissolved in the year 2012 and the same account was continued by the proprietor having PAN – AASPN3795R who also continued the business. The copy of the letter is scanned and placed below for the sake of clarity. 4.2 The appellant provided the copy of the return of income of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of “Bhagwan Das and Sons” having PAN - AASPN3795R. In the said return of income, there is specific mention regarding the cash deposit of Rs.77,99,400/- in the bank account no. 212. S. No IFSC Code Name of the Bank Account No should be in 9 digit or same as per CBS System Cash deposit during 9-11- 2016 to 30-11- 2016 (if aggregate cash deposit is more than Rs 2.50 Lacs) 1 YESBOUUCB08 Yes Bank Limited 212 77,99,400/- 4.3 Regarding IFSC code - YESB0UUCB08, it has been submitted that the bank was not having its own IFSC code in that year and therefore Yes Bank code was used during that period however, the account is actually held in The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd whose abbreviation is UUCB which having place in the IFSC code. 4.4 The appellant has also provided the copy of assessment order in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of “Bhagwan Das and Sons” having PAN - AASPN3795R for the A.Y. 2017-18 assessed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 23.05.2023 wherein the issue of cash deposit of Rs.76,54,400/- was the material issue and the AO has accepted that the deposits in the bank accounts maintained by assessee are nothing but cash sales and no addition was made. 4.5 Considering the overall discussion made above, it is apparent that – i. The appellant firm having PAN – AAEFB5256B was dissolved in the year 2012. ii. The business of the appellant firm was taken over and carried out by I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 10 Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda having PAN - AASPN3795R in the same name after dissolution of the appellant firm. iii. The bank account held by the appellant firm was continued by the proprietor. iv. The issue of cash deposit of Rs.76,54,400/- was considered in the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 23.05.2023 for the A.Y. 2017-18 in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda having PAN - AASPN3795R. 4.6 In view of the above facts, no addition is warranted in the case of the appellant firm and therefore, the AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs.76,54,400/- made u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Accordingly the all the grounds raised by the appellant are allowed. 5 Being aggrieved by this order present appeal is filed by the department which has following ground : 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case , the Learned CIT (A), NeFAC Delhi was justified in deleting the addition of Rs 79,54,400/- made by the AO on account of unexplained money u/s 69A . OUR SUBMISSION 1. First Ground Appeal - It is respectfully submitted that the Ground raised by the Department is mainly concerned that whether the deletion of addition by the Ld. CIT (A) is justified in the given facts and circumstances of the case. Facts and Circumstances: a) It is respectfully submitted that present case is originated on account of deposit of Cash Rs 79,54,400/- during demonetization period in Bank Account No 786111318000212 or 212 at Krishi Upaj Mandi Savina Branch of The Udaipur Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd . The Bank account is maintained in the name of M/s Bhagwan Das and Sons and linked PAN No to the Account was AAEFB5256B. b) It is respectfully submitted in response to notice under section 133(6) respondent assessee submitted that : i) That Bank Account No 212 and 786111318000212 is of number of only one bank account i.e 212 is old number and 786111318000212 is altered number when Bank migrated to CBS System. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 11 ii) That PAN No AAEFB5256 is of M/s Bhagwan Das & Sons which was a partnership firm. However the said Partnership Firm was dissolved wef 01.04.2012. iii) That after 01.04.2012 said account is operated in the same name & style as Sole Proprietor Smt Kanta Devi Nadga and her PAN No is AASPN3795R. iv) A certificate from Bank about this fact alongwith affidavit and VAT Registration Cancellation Certificate were submitted. c) However a fresh notice was issued u/s 142(1) in the name of assessee for filing of return in view of large Deposit during demonetization period. d) Thus the main basic fact of the present appeal is cash deposited during demonetization period in Bank Account No 786111318000212 held in The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd, Krishi Upaj Mandi Branch Udaipur linked with PAN No AAEFB5256 belonging to the respondent M/s Bhagwan Das & Sons- a partnership Firm. e) It is undisputed Fact that said partnership firm was dissolved in 01.04.2012 and one partner Smt Kanta Devi Nagda PAN No AASPN3795R continued the same business in the same name & style as Sole Proprietorship . f) It is also undisputed fact that respondent has submitted aforesaid information along with letters from Bank and VAT Cancellation certificate before AO to establish that the account is operated by Smt Kanta Devi Nagda – as sole proprietor and firm is not doing any business and PAN No of Firm remained linked with said account by mistake. The said facts were also confirmed by the Bank a third party agency on which respondent has no control. Unfortunately during Assessment Proceeding he could not trace the Dissolution deed. g) It is also undisputed facts that Ld AO added Rs Rs.76,54,400/- only due to non-submission of Dissolution Deed as stated below i.e. Para 3 page 2 & 3 of Assessment Order : “ The submission made by the assessee have been considered. As per information available on record the assessee M/s. Bhagwan Das & Sons (PAN : AAEFB 5256 B) has deposited cash of Rs. 79,54,400 in its bank account No. 786111318000212 maintained with The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Udaipur during the period of demonetisation. The assessee failed to file return of income in compliance to notice under section 142(1) of the I.T. Act,1961 dated 23.12.2017. The assessee also failed to furnish a copy of dissolution deed of the firm. The assessee failed to explain the source of cash deposited by the assessee during the demonetisation period in its bank account No. 786111318000212 maintained with The Udaipur Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Udaipur. Therefore, cash deposit of Rs. 79,54,400 in bank account of the assessee is treated as unexplained money under Section 69A of the I.T. Act,1961 and added to its income chargeable to tax under section 115BBE of the I.T. Act,1961 for the year under consideration. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 12 h) It is respectfully submitted that respondent Assessee only submitted following additional documents before honourable CIT(A) : a) Dissolution Deed b) Copy of ITR of Smt Kanta Devi Nagda A Y 2017-18 c) Assessment Order of Smt Kanta Devi Nagda A Y 2017-18 i) It is respectfully submitted that out of above documents Dissolution Deed is only for confirming the fact that firm is dissolved which was duly verified by the bank that account is operated as of Sole Proprietorship Concern and Partnership Firm is already dissolved. j) In our humble opinion the Ld. CIT A is perfectly justified that money treated as deposited by the respondent assessee by the Ld. AO in the so called bank account does not belong to the firm in view of following basic facts and documents : a) That respondent Firm is not existing in relevant period in view of its dissolution long back in 2012. b) That the Bank itself confirmed that the Account which is linked with PAN of the Firm is factually belongs to sole proprietor Smt Kanta Devi Nagda due to mistake. c) That VAT Registration of the Firm was also cancelled. d) Lastly the said deposit of Rs 79,54,400/- is also considered in the hands of that PAN Holder. 2. It is respectfully submitted that after considering the same facts that PAN No linked with the Bank Account is factually wrong the respondent assessee’s reopened case u/s 148 for AY 2015-16 for cash deposit of Rs 4,40,70,000/- is completed at NIL Income vide order dated 04.05.2023 with following observation : (Page no 4 ) 3.4 Reasons for inference drawn that no variation is required on this issue. The assessee vide submission dated 25/05/2023 submitted that partnership firm having PAN AAEFB5256B dissolved vide Registered Dissolution Deed dated 10/07/2012 through a dissolution deed executed on 13/07/2012. As per the terms and conditions of the dissolution deed, the business of the partnership firm was taken over by one of the partner Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda (PAN AASPN3795R),on going concern basis. The name of the business entity viz BHAGWAN DAS AND SONS and the nature of the business viz wholesale and retail trading before and after the dissolution of Firm continued to be the same. But the constitution of business was changed from partnership to proprietorship. Further , The Udaipur Urban Co Operative Bank Ltd. has already certified vide letter dated 20/06/2019 that Firm’s PAN was continued in the case of proprietorship business, which was dissolved in the year of 2012. The letter I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 13 dated 20/06/2019, which is kept in record. In this case the appeal decided by CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 , in favor of the assessee ,the Hon’ble CIT(A) vide its order dated 21/08/2023 for AY. 2017-18 , has accepted the fact that firm got dissolved in year 2012 and by mistake of bank, firm PAN number was carried for years in proprietorship bank account number. 4. In view of the above no variation is proposed in the case of the Firm . No penalty for not filing return of income u/s.139(1) or concealment penalty is required to be initiated in this case as the firm has discontinued since 2012 and also the reason for which the case has been reopened does not belong to the assessee firm. The total Income determined as below. Return Income -NIL Assessed Income –NIL 5. It is respectfully submitted that penalty proceeding u/s 272A(1)d is dropped by the learned AO wide order date 07.06.2021 long before finalization of Appeal Proceeding with following observation : (Para 4 to 6) Para 4- Reply of the assessee has been verified with reference to the assessment order. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee firm had stated about the dissolution of the firm in 2012 and was categorically asked about the Dissolution Deed which could not be produced by stating that the same was could not be found. 5. As the assessee has now furnished the copy of Dissolution Deed, according to which assessee firm was dissolved in the year 2012, thus, the firm is not in the obligation of filing of return of income since no business activity had been carried out by the firm. 6. Keeping in view of above, since the firm was nonexistent during the year under consideration, thus, penalty proceedings initiated u/s 272A(1)(d) of the Act are hereby dropped. It is respectfully submitted that this confirms our submission that LD AO made addition in the income only due to non-submission of Dissolution deed during assessment proceeding and now AO himself has accepted the fact that addition in this case is not warranted. In view of all above, we humbly request your goodself that deletion of addition by the Ld. CIT (A) NeFAC is fully justified. I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 14 Your goodself is requested to confirm the order passed by the Ld CIT A and oblige. 7.1 To support the various contentions so raised in the written submission and in support of the oral arguments, a paper book filed containing following documents/ records. S. No. Particulars From To 1 Written submission 1 13 2 Assessment Order for AY 2015-16 14 13 3 Dissolution Deed 19 19 4 Letter from UUCB Dated 31.1.2018 20 20 5 Letter from UUCB Dated 20.06.2019 21 21 6 VAT Cancellation Certificate 22 22 7 Assessment Order Smt Kanta Devi Nagda 23 27 8 Written Submission before AO-1 28 29 9 Written submission before AO-2 30 33 10 Penalty order Asst Year 2017-18 34 35 10 CIT A Order 36 43 11 Assessment order 2017-18 44 46 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed on record. The brief fact of the case is that the assessee firm “Bhgwan Das and Sons” was dissolved in the year 2012. The said partnership firm business was carried on by Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda in her Individual capacity in the name of Bhagwan Das and Sons. The firm was already dissolved in the year 2012, but in the assessment proceeding the assessee could not file the copy of the dissolution deed the assessment was made in the name of the firm holding that the I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 15 assessee unable to explain the source of cash deposited into the bank account. The ld. AO made the addition on account of the confusion that the account no.(s) 212 and 7886111318000212 held in the Udaipur Co- operative Bank Ltd., Krishi Mandi, Udaipur. This account were not two account but were one and same were belong to and operated by the proprietor Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda as proprietor of “M/s. Bhagwan Das and Sons”. This fact is clarified by the bank vide letter dated 31.01.2018 addressed to the ld. AO. The said bank vide letter dated 20.06.2019 also clarified that the assessee firm was maintaining account with their bank but upon dissolution of the firm in 2012 the same account continued by the proprietor having PAN -AASPN3795R who is continued the business. The assessee firm has also placed on record the copy of the return of income of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda, Proprietor of “M/s. Bhagwan Das and Sons” having PAN-AASPN3597R. In the said return of income so filed there is specific mention regarding the deposit of cash in the bank account no. 212. The copy of that return of income has already referred by the ld. CIT(A) vide page 7 of this order. The assessee has also placed on record the copy of the assessment order in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda for the A. Y. 2017-18 assessed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 23.05.2023 wherein the issue of cash deposit for an amount of Rs. 76,54,400/- was the material issue and the ld. AO in that cae has I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 16 accepted that deposit in the bank account maintained by that assessee having PAN AASPN3795R is arising out of the cash sales made by that assessee and thus, the issue for which the addition made by the ld. AO was deleted based on these set of facts by the ld. CIT(A). Based on these set of facts the bench noted the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is after careful persuasion of the records and it is also a rule that the same income cannot be taxed in the hands of the two person, when in the case of Mrs. Kanta Devi Nagda the deposit of cash into the same bank account has been considered by the said assessee AO there is no need to again taxed the assessee firm which is dissolved in the year 2012 as unexplained cash deposit. Ergo, we do not find any merits in the grounds of the appeal of the revenue, and we do not find any infirmity in the detailed finding of the ld. CIT(A). 9. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by placing the details on the notice board. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) Judicial Member Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 378/Jodh/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 17 Ganesh Kumar, PS (On Tour) Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on Sr.PS/PS 2. Draft placed before author Sr.PS/PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 9. Date on which file goes to the AR 10. Date of dispatch of Order