Dilip Kevalchand Vora, Solapur V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle 1(2), Pune

ITA 60/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Dilip Kevalchand Vora, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)-11, Pune, which confirmed the addition of Rs.9.00 lakh to his income for the assessment year 2017-18. The addition was initially made by the AO during the assessment proceedings, suspecting the source of Rs.9.00 lakh deposited in the appellant's bank account during the demonetization period. The appellant had declared a total income of Rs.3,35,080 and explained that the deposit was from cash in hand carried over from the previous year and other transactions. However, the cash book was not provided during the assessment, leading to the addition. The Tribunal found it necessary to verify the cash book to ascertain the source of the deposit and thus set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the AO.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 124154 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 19-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.60/PUN/2023 नधा रण वष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 Dilip Kevalchand Vora, Shivapur Peth, A/P. Akluj, Tal. Malshiras, Dist. Solapur – 413 101 Maharashtra PAN : AASPV5379D Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-11, Pune on 28-12-2022 in relation to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.9.00 lakh made u/s.68 of the Act. 3. Tersely, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return declaring total income at Rs.3,35,080/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee made cash deposits in his bank account amounting to Assessee by Shri Bharat Shah Revenue by Shri Ganesh B. Budruk Date of hearing 20-04-2023 Date of pronouncement 21-04-2023 ITA No.60/PUN/2023 Dilip Kevalchand Vora 2 Rs.69.00 lakh during demonetization period. The AO accepted the explanation of the assessee in respect of Rs.60.00 lakh, being, the income declared under Income-tax Declaration Scheme, 2016. The remaining amount of Rs.9.00 lakh was added on the ground that the assessee did not furnish cash book for the year under consideration. The ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition, against which the assessee has approached the Tribunal. 4. Having heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material on record, it is seen that the assessee filed return for the immediately preceding assessment year 2016-17 on 25-07-2016 (i.e. much prior to the announcement of demonetization scheme), in which cash in hand of Rs.13,35,118/- was shown. The closing cash in hand for the immediately preceding assessment year became opening cash in hand for the year under consideration. The assessee claimed that Rs.9.00 lakh was deposited out of such opening balance and other transactions generating cash. The case of the assessee is that regular books of account were maintained and the amount deposited of Rs.9.00 lakh was out of balance available in the cash book. However, the assessee did not furnish the cash book as has been noted in the assessment order. The ld. AR submitted that the ITA No.60/PUN/2023 Dilip Kevalchand Vora 3 AO, in fact, did not make any requisition for the cash book which, if demanded, would have been produced. It is important to verify the source of deposit of Rs.9.00 lakh with reference to the cash book maintained by the assessee. As the ld. AR has admitted that the regular cash book was maintained, I am of the considered opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order on this issue is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of AO. I order accordingly and direct him to verify the assessee’s cash book for ascertaining the source of cash deposit of Rs.9.00 lakh. Needless to say, the assessee will be allowed reasonable opportunity of hearing. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21 st April, 2023. Sd/- ( R.S.SYAL) VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; िदनांक Dated : 21 st April, 2023 सतीश ITA No.60/PUN/2023 Dilip Kevalchand Vora 4 आदेश की ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. थ / The Respondent 3. 4. 5. The Pr.CIT concerned DR, ITAT, ‘SMC’ Bench, Pune गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 20-04-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 21-04-2023 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *