M/S DILIP KUMAR & SONS , CHENNAI V. ACIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 (2) , CHENNAI

ITA 764/CHNY/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Dilip Kumar & Sons, a jewelry merchant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai, which sustained the addition of Rs. 20,00,000 as unexplained cash credits made by the Assessing Officer during the assessment for the year 2016-17. The addition was based on discrepancies in the cash balances reported in the assessee's books and the income tax returns filed for the relevant financial years. The Tribunal examined the documents and arguments presented by both parties, including a cash book and VAT returns, but found the explanations provided by the assessee unsatisfactory, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127436 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘ए’/ SMC यायपीठ, चे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ /SMC BENCH, CHENNAI ी महावीर संह, उपा य के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT आयकरअपीलसं./I. T. A. No. 7 6 4/ Chn y/ 2 0 2 2 ( नधा रणवष / A s se s s m e nt Yea r : 2 01 6- 17 ) M/s.Dilip Kumar & Sons 11/29, Elango Salai, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018. V s The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2) Chennai. P AN: A A DH D 6 7 0 1 N (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr. N.Arjunraj, C.A for Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate यथ क ओरसे/Respondent by : Mr. S.Chandrasekaran, JCIT स ु नवाईक तार ख/D a t e o f h e a r i n g : 08.03.2023 घोषणाक तार ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t : 10.03.2023 आदेश / O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is arising out of order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Chennai dated 22.08.2022. The assessment was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Chennai for the relevant assessment year 2016-17 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) vide order dated 30.11.2018. 2. The only issue in this appeal of the assessee is as regards to order of the CIT(A) sustaining addition of Rs.20 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained cash credits u/s.68 of the Act. For this issue, the assessee has raised 2 ITA No. 764/Chny/2022 various grounds which are argumentative and factual, hence, need not be reproduced. 3. I have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. I noted that the assessee is a jewelery merchant doing business in the name and style of M/s. S.D Jewellers. The assessee is HUF. The Assessing Officer received information that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs.25 lakhs during the demonetization period in specified bank notes from 09.11.2016 to 30.11.2016 amounting to Rs.25 lakhs. Now, before me the assessment year involved is 2016-17 and relevant to financial year 2015-16. The demonetization period does not come under the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer noted from the cash book for the financial year 2015-16 relevant to this assessment year 2016-17 that the assessee has shown opening cash balance as on 01.04.2015 at Rs.25,44,809/-, but the assessee has shown cash balance in its return of income filed for assessment year 2015-16 relevant to financial year 2014-15 as ‘Nil’ cash as on 31.03.2015. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain as to why opening cash of Rs.25,44,809/- 3 ITA No. 764/Chny/2022 shown as on 01.04.2015 be not treated as unexplained cash credit in the books of account of the assessee and be not taxed. The assessee replied that for financial year 2014-15 relevant to the assessment year 2015-16, the assessee filed return in Form No.ITR-4S admitting income u/s.44AD of the Act, as the assessee has not maintained any books of account. Hence, due to mistake, he could not disclose this cash in hand. Now, before me, the learned counsel for the assessee filed cash book pertaining to M/s. S.D. Jewellers from page 5 to 8 of assessee’s paper book, wherein cash generation and cash withdrawal are shown. This cash book pertains to financial year 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015 and closing balance as per this cash book is Rs.24,60,562/-. The assessee in support of cash book also filed Vat returns, financial statements consolidated for the year ending 31.03.2015 and 31.03.2016. The learned counsel for the assessee only requested that the same be verified and matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for considering these evidences, because the assessee failed to file the same before the Assessing Officer or CIT(A) during assessment proceedings or appellate proceedings at first stage. 4 ITA No. 764/Chny/2022 4. The learned Sr.D.R clearly objected and stated that these are manufactured documents and not reliable at all. 5. I have taken note of documents filed by the assessee consisting of nine pages, including cash book of the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 for relevant financial year 2014- 15. But, it is a fact that the assessee has not disclosed this cash balance as on 31.03.2015 in the return of income filed in Form ITR-4S, which is available on record and produced by the learned Sr.D.R. 6. After hearing both the sides and going through facts of the case, I am of the view that the assessee is unable to explain source of this cash, except one argument made that cash deposit is made during demonetization period and that should have been assessed in assessment year 2017-18. I do not agree with the explanation of the assessee and this cash balance as on 01.04.2015 is shown by the assessee just to explain out cash deposited by the assessee during demonetization period amounting to Rs.25.00 lakhs. Hence, I dismiss appeal of the assessee, whereby the Assessing Officer himself has added only a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-. Hence, 5 ITA No. 764/Chny/2022 addition of Rs.20.00 lakhs is confirmed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 10 th March, 2023 Sd/- (महावीर संह) (Mahavir Singh) उपा य / Vice-President चे$नई/Chennai, %दनांक/Dated 10.03.2023 DS आदेश क त)ल*प अ+े*षत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु ,त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आय ु ,त/CIT 5. *वभागीय त न0ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.