Cash Deposit During Demonetization Can't Be Taxed As Unexplained U/S 69A If Source Is Explained: Ahmedabad ITAT
Pankaj Bajpai
8 Feb 2024 7:41 AM GMT
The Ahmedabad ITAT held that the AO as well as the CIT(A) was not right in making the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 49,80,000/- in bank account during the demonetization period by invoking section 69A of the Income tax Act, as the assessee has fully explained the cash deposits and thus the same cannot be treated as unexplained money.The Bench of Suchitra Kamble (Judicial...
The Ahmedabad ITAT held that the AO as well as the CIT(A) was not right in making the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 49,80,000/- in bank account during the demonetization period by invoking section 69A of the Income tax Act, as the assessee has fully explained the cash deposits and thus the same cannot be treated as unexplained money.
The Bench of Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member) observed that “the assessee has given all the details as to how the assessee has that much cash in hand during the demonetization period. This was never doubted by the Revenue. In fact, the bank statements clearly show including the details given of the students from which the fees and the money has been received”. (Para 7)
As per the brief facts of the case, the assessee trust filed its return declaring Nil income. The trust is doing educational activities by running a college in the name of Vadodara Design Academy and its source of income is student's fees & consulting fees. Finding that assessee has shown accumulated cash on hand towards study tour expense, the AO made addition of Rs. 49,80,000/- u/s. 69A on account of unexplained money.
The Bench noted that the books of accounts of assessee trust were never rejected at any point of time by the Assessing Officer.
Besides this, the Bench pointed those evidences produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) clearly shows that the assessee has received fees from students related to the event as well as study tour including the buildthon event fund.
The assessee has given the cash bills from bank from 01-04-2016 to 08-11-2016. Hence, the assessee has given the expenses for the said period, added the Bench.
Thus, emphasizing that the bank slip cannot be crucial evidence to reject the other direct evidence produced by the assessee before the Assessing Officer, the ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal.
Counsel for Appellant/ Assessee: M.S. Chhajed
Counsel for Respondent/ Department: Purushottam Kumar
Case Title: Amikrupa Education Trust verses ITO
Case Number: ITA No. 581/Ahd/2023
