AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER RENU JAUHRI :
The above captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.07.2025, passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [for short, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC], New Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as, “Act”] for A.Y. 2017-18 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi- 18/10344/2019-20.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred, both in law and on facts, in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the books of account and sustaining the addition of 80,10,000/- under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by treating the cash deposits as unexplained credits, without pointing out any specific defects in the books of account and without properly appreciating the facts, evidences and explanations produced before the AO, as find placed on record.
2.That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer in taxing the addition of ₹80,10,000/-under section 115BBE at the rate of 60%, even though the impugned deposits represented recorded sales duly reflected in the books of account, which cannot be treated as "unexplained income" exigible to section 115BBE, which was introduced by the Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016.
3.That the learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the consequential effect of charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D and initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271AAC of the Act.
4.That the appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. ”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return for A.Y. 2017-18, on 31.10.2017, declaring income of Rs. 5,03,440/-. The case was selected for scrutiny on the issue of cash deposits made during demonetisation period. The assessment was completed at an income of Rs. 85,13,440/- vide order u/s 143(3) dated 30.12.2019 after making addition on account of unexplained cash of 80,10,000/- deposited in the bank accounts during demonetisation period. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A).
The appeal was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 30.07.2025. Further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
At the outset, Ld. AR has submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) was passed without properly appreciating the facts of the case. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that requisite documentary evidences or details were not submitted during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedings. He has, therefore, requested that the matter may be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
After hearing both the parties and, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and furnish requisite evidences before Ld. CIT(A) to enable adjudication on merits.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.