MANOJ BANWARILAL AGRAWAL,AHMEDABAD V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

ITA 196/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Manoj Banwarilal Agrawal, a wholesale-retailer of pan masala and gutkha, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The dispute centered on the addition of Rs. 11,31,800 to the assessee's income, which was treated as unexplained cash deposits under sections 68 and 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer (AO) had noted substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts relative to his reported sales, leading to suspicions of unexplained income. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, but the Tribunal, after considering the nature of the assessee's business and the explanations provided, concluded that the deposits were from regular business income and not unexplained.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33530 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVINDRA
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIN S. SHAH
• Section: 250; 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.196/Ahd/2024 Asstt.Year : 2017-18 Manoj Banwarilal Agrawal (Individual) A-7, Amardeep Apartment Opp: Sattadhar Estate Nikol Road Thakkar Bapanagar Ahmedabad. PAN : BNLPS 9558 R Vs ITO, Ward-3(3)(5) Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Parin S. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Ravindra, SR.DR सुनवाई क\t तारीख/Date of Hearing : 10/10/2024 घोषणा क\t तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 10/10/2024 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/O R D E R This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.12.2023 for the Asst.Year 2017-18 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short). 2. In the appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. The order passed by lower authorities is invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.11,31,800/-u/s 68 of the Act ignoring fact that said amount has been offered as sales in return of income. 3. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in treating cash deposited in bank accounts as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. ITA No.196/Ahd/2024 2 4. Ld. NFAC erred in law and in facts in making same addition by invoking two sections which is not permissible in law. 5. Ld.NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming action of AO of charging same at special rate as per section 115BBE of the Act. 6. Charging of interest u/s.234B, 234C and 234D are unjustified. 3. The facts emerge from the relevant records of the Revenue authorities are that the assessee is a whole-sale-cum-retailer of pan masala, gutkha etc. From the bank statements furnished, the ld.AO noticed that the assessee has made cash deposits as under: MONTH SALES IN RS. CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK % OF CASH DEPOSITED TO SALES AUGUST-16 6,23,263 5,56,400 89.27% SEPT-16 8,40,817 7,92,500 94.25% OCTOBER-16 8,14,851 7,86,900 96.57% NOVEMBER-16 4,84,538 5,02,900 103.79% DECEMBER-16 7,31,164 7,05,400 96.48% 4. In the absence proper explanation/details by the assessee, the AO made addition of Rs.11,31,800/- on account of cash deposits made in the bank viz. Karnavati Co-operative Bank Ltd. in the months of November/December, 2016. The ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO holding that the assessee remained evasive and non-complaint and the appellant has merely claimed in the state of facts that the source of bank deposits mentioned bank statements statement are from cash balance available with the assessee as on 9.11.2016. 5. Before me, the ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the cash deposits made are in connection with the business of the assessee, as can be deciphered from the table above. ITA No.196/Ahd/2024 3 On the other hand, the ld.DR argued that the assessee could not substantiate the source of cash. 6. Having gone through the record, and the type of business of the assessee, and I find that the assessee has made the following month- wise cash deposits made in the bank: August, 2016 : Rs.5,56,400/- September, 2016 : Rs.7,92,500/- October, 2016 : Rs.7,86,900/- November, 2016 : Rs.5,02,900/- December, 2016 : Rs.7,05,400/- 7. Looking to the above quantum of the amount deposited by the assessee, it cannot be considered abnormal in the absence of any material being brought on record by the Revenue, and therefore, it can be safely stated that the assessee would have made the cash deposits out of regular income of the assessee. Hence, I allow the grounds raised by the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Dictated on the Open Court, typed and pronounced on 10th October, 2024. Copy of this order be given to the assessee. The Registry is directed to dispatch as per procedure. Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad, dated 10/10/2024 vk* "