Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 132845 (ITAT-PUNE)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 month(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
30-07-2023
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
A
Next Hearing Date
19-07-2023
Assessment Year
2019-2020
Appeal Filed On
29-06-2023
Judgement Text
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.773/PUN/2023 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/s. The Khemraj Bakery, 698, E – Ward, 4 th Lane, Shahupuri, Kolhapur-416001 PAN : AAGFT1800P ......प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 20-07-2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 31-07-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 21-04-2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2019-20. 2. The appellant-revenue raised three grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in holding non-applicability of provisions u/s. 115BBE of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2 ITA No. 773/PUN/2023, A.Y. 2019-20 3. We note that the assessee is a firm, conducts its business under the name and style as “The Khemraj Bakery”. The assessee engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of bakery products. A survey was conducted on 28-02-2019 u/s. 133A of the Act. According to the AO, two registers were found and impounded during the course of said survey. The said survey team quantified sale in cash to an extent of Rs.80,00,600/- and the assessee was asked to prove the said cash sales from its cash book. It was explained that the cash sales caused affected from its factory premises and not from the counter sales from its shop, offered the said amount as additional income. Admittedly, the said additional income offered to tax through profit and loss account and clamed net profit of Rs.49,02,196/- under the head income from business. The AO did not accept the same as business income and treated the additional income as unaccounted cash sales, added the same u/s. 69A of the Act, consequently, charged unaccounted cash sales u/s. 115BBE of the Act. 4. The CIT(A) considering the various decisions held the cash sales clearly corresponds to sale of bakery items and cannot be said unexplained. Further, he held the said income cannot be taxed u/s. 69A of the Act and made non-applicability of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. Before us, the ld. AR drew our attention to the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Bajargan Traders reported in (2017) 86 taxmann.com 295 (Raj.) which held the excess cash found during the course of survey is taxable under the head business and no provisions u/s. 115BBE is attracted. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the batch of cases, lead case being Ashok K. Kriplani in ITA No. 252/PUN/2023 for A.Y. 2018-19 by following the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Bajargan Traders (supra) held non-applicability of provisions u/s. 115BBE of the Act to the additional income offered during the course of survey attracting the provisions u/s. 69A of the Act. The said order is 3 ITA No. 773/PUN/2023, A.Y. 2019-20 placed on record in legal compilation at page Nos. 1 to 4 of the paper book. The ld. DR did not dispute the same. Therefore, following the same, we are of the considered opinion that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Bajargan Traders (supra) is applicable to the facts on hand. Thus, we hold that the additional income offered during the survey which was travelled through profit and loss account of the assessee, is a business income and no provisions u/s. 69A is attracted. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in holding non- applicability of charging of tax u/s. 115BBE of the Act. Thus, the order of CIT(A) is justified and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 31 st July, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिनाांक / Dated : 31 st July, 2023. रदव आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-11, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT (Central), Pune. 5. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गार्ड फ़ाइल / Guard File. //सत्यादपत प्रदत// True Copy// आिेशानुसार / BY ORDER, वररष्ठ दनजी सदचव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
AI Insights
The case involves the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Kolhapur as the appellant and The Khemraj Bakery as the respondent. The dispute arose from a survey conducted under section 133A of the Income Tax Act on 28-02-2019, where unaccounted cash sales were identified. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these as unaccounted cash sales under section 69A and charged them under section 115BBE. However, the CIT(A) reversed this decision, leading to the Revenue's appeal. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by the legal precedent that such additional income, if offered during a survey and related to business activities, should be taxed as business income and not under section 115BBE.
