Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Bina Goenka The Jeweller Llp , Mumbai vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 23 September, 2024
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "B" MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
AND
SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER)
ITA No. 737/MUM/2024
Assessment Year: 2017-18
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP, Asst. CIT Circle-25(2),
501 Kings Apartments, Juhu 220, 2nd floor, Kautilya Bhavan, C-41
Between JW Mariot and Tulip Vs. to C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla
Star, Complex, Bandra (East),
Mumbai-400092. Mumbai-400051.
PAN NO. AAPFB 7501 C
Appellant Respondent
Assessee by : Mr. Siddharth Kothari
Revenue by : Mr. Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. DR
Date of He aring : 24/07/2024
Date of pronouncement : 23/09/2024
ORDER
PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 19.01.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short 'the Ld. CIT(A)'] for assessment year 2017-18, raising following grounds:
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 2 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the ass assessee is a limited liability partnership (LLP) firm, which has been incorporated on 12/10/2015. The assessee firm is engaged in retail trading activity of finished studded jewellary products for its domestic and international customers. For the year under consideration, the assessee filed return of income on 29/11/2017 2017 declaring total income at ₹ 24,14,650/ 650/-.. The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny through computer computer-assisted assisted selection rge cash deposits in process mainly for the reasons inter-alia, large bank accounts during the monetization period, abnormal increase in sales with decreasing profitability compared to preceding year.
The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices under the Income-tax Income Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') which were duly served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer also gathered relevant bank statement of the assessee from the bank invoking authority under ct. The Assessing Officer asked details of section 133(6) of the Act.
cash deposit and Cash sales for the year under consideration before and after 08/11/2016 2016 ( i.e. the date on which currency notes of rupees thousand and five hundred were held to be invalid and withdrawn Government of India). Similar hdrawn from circulation by the Government details of cash deposits and cash sales for preceding assessment assess years were also called for. From the details furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer observed that in the preceding assessment year , there was no cash sales or cash deposit but in the year under consideration, in the week immediately prior to the Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 3 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 date of the demonetization i.e. 8/11/2016,, the assessee shown cash sales of ₹ 34, 50, 000/-and 000/ and after the said date, assessee shown cash deposits of ₹ 32, 95, 500/-from 500/ from 08/11/2016 to 30/11/2016 and then cash deposits of ₹ 1, 54, 500/- was shown for the period from 01/12/2016 to 31/12/2016. From the details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer observed abnormal increase in cash sales in the e year under consideration as compared to the preceding year. The Assessing Officer found it abnormal that the assessee had 2015 16 and 2016-17 no cash sales throughout the financial year 2015-16 2016 except for one day i.e. 28/10/2016. In the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the trend of the cash deposit clearly indicated that the assessee had artificially booked bogus sales on one particular day to justify unaccounted cash with it on 08/11/2016 i.e. the day on which demonetization was declared. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee by way of show cause notice dated 14/12/2019 to explain the steep increase in cash sales in October 2016. In view of no compliance on the part of the assessee, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order dated 16/12/2019 passed under section passed s 143(3) of the Act concluded the cash deposits of ₹ 34,50,000/-as unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the Act.
A
3. On further appeal, the assessee filed detail submissions and explained source and nature of the credit of ₹ 34,50, 34,50,000/-in its books of accounts, but the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 4 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 assessee and upheld the finding finding of the Assessing Officer, observing as under:
7.1.2 During the appellate proceedings, in his written submissions, the "7.1.2 contention to justify the cash sales. The Ld. AO has appellant has given contention made a logical analysis in which he proved that cash sales were made only during the specific period and no cash sale was made both before and after the said period. On the other hand, the appellant tried to justify ju season As can be seen from the that the cash sales was due to festive season.
submissions of the appellant, the process of cash deposit started on the date of 10.11.2016 and ended on 19.12.2016. After that no cash was ew cash memos valuing less than 2 deposit. The appellant also furnished ffew lacs to prove that the details of buyers in case of cash sales is not required. The appellant further take contention that all the cash sales are recorded in books of accounts and the stock register is also maintained. The appellant did not enclose the cash register during the appellant proceedings. As noted by the AO and held in these proceedings the so- so called cash sale during demonetization period was bogus and the cash sale ledger and books were fabricated. These books are are now rejected u/s 145 of the Act. 1965. The financial result such as profit and loss arising so called cash sales is treated as out of such books are also rejected. The so-called unaccounted income / asset of the appellant; hence, held falling u/s 68 and 69 of the Act. The findings of the AO are confirmed. The ground of the appellant is dismissed."
dismissed.
4. We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused various documents filed by the assessee in the paper-books paper d No. one of the containing pages 1 to 165 and 1 to 76. The ground appeal was not pressed and therefore same is dismissed as infructuous. The ground Nos. 2 to 4 of the appeal are related to the issue of cash deposits of ₹ 34,50,000/-held held by the Assessing Officer Act. Out of the as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the A cash of ₹ 34,50,000/ 000/-, the assessee deposited ₹ 32, 95, 500/-
500/ into 2016 and deposited ₹ the bank account from 10/11/2016 to 30/11/2016 1,54,500/- on 19/12/2016 . The relevant part of the cash book of the assessee available on paperbook pages p 144 and 145 is reproduced as under:
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 5 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 1-11-2016 To Opening Balance 34,50,500.00 10-11-2016 By Ву State Bank of India 8 1,95,000.00 32,55,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 11-11-2016 By Ву State Bank of India 9 1,98,000.00 30,57,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank By Axis 916020010932245 10 1,95,000.00 28,62,000.00 Dr Contra Being cash deposited in bank 12-11-2016 By State Bank of India 11 1,92,000.00 26,70,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 13-11-2016 By State Bank of India 12 1,90,000.00 24,80,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 15-11-2016 By State Bank of India 13 1,95,000.00 22,85,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 16-11-2016 By State Bank of India 14 1,95,000.00 20,90,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 17-11-2016 By Ву State Bank of India 15 1,92,000.00 18,98,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 18-11-2016 By State Bank of India 16 1,95,000.00 17,03,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 19-11-2016 By State Bank of India 17 1,92,000.00 15,11,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 21-11-2016 By State Bank of India 18 1,93,000.00 13,18,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 22-11-2016 By State Bank of India 19 1,95,000.00 11,23,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 23-11-2016 By State Bank of India 20 1,94,000.00 9,29,000.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 24-11-2016 By State Bank of India 21 1,94,500.00 7,34,500.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 25-11-2016 By State Bank of India 22 1,95,000.00 5,39,500.00 Dr Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 6 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 28-11-2016 By State Bank of India 23 1,92,000.00 3,47,500.00 Dr 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank Carried Over 34,50,000.00 31,02,500.00 Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP Cash Book : 1-Apr-2016 to 31-Mar Mar-2017 Date Partic Vch Type Vch No Debit Credit Balanace ulars Brought Forward 34,50,000.00 31,02,500.00 31-11-2016 By State Bank of India 24 1,93,000.00 1,54,500.00 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 34,50,000.00 32,95,500.00 By Closing Balance 1,54,500.00 34,50,000.00 34,50,000.00 1-12-2016 To Opening Balance 1,54,500.00 19-12-2016 By State Bank of India 25 1,54,500.00 35409029868 Contra Being cash deposited in bank 1,54,500.00 1,54,500.00
5. Before us, the learned counsel for assessee explained that the as cash sales made by the assessee on source of cash deposits was 28/10/2016, details of which is available in cash book. The relevant part of said cash book (paper book page 141 to 144 ) is reproduced as under::
28-10-2016 To (As per details) Sales BG/16-17/034 1,95,000.00 1,95,000.00 Dr. Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr Being Jewellery Sales Pendant-8585(1) 8585(1) Diamond 0.43 Cts, Pearls 12.35 Cts, Gold Wt 4.25 gms against Inv No. BG 16-17-040 040 Dt: 28/10/2016 To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/035 1,98,000.00 3,93,000.00 Dr Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,95,652.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,348.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales Pendant-
Pendant PD
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 7
ITA No. 737/MUM/2024
-8585(2)
8585(2) Diamond
00.52 Cts, Pearls
12.32 Cts, Gold Wt
4.59 gms against Inv
No. BG /16-17/035
/16
Dt: 28/10/2016
To To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/035 1,95,000.00 5,88,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Ring-RG-370(4)
Ring
Diamond 01.93 Cts, Cts
Gold Wt 3.87 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/036
17/036 Dt:
28/10/2016
Carried Over 5,92,500.00 4,500.00
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP Cash Book : 1-Apr-2016 to 31-Mar Mar-2017 Date Particulars Vch Type Vch No. Debit Credit Balance Brought Forward 5,92,500.00 4,500.00 28-10-2016 To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/037 1,92,000.00 7,80,000.00 Dr Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,89,723.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,277.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales ER-8171(1) 8171(1) Diamond 0.19 Cts, Cts rubies 3.08cts, Emeralds 3.70 cts, Gold Wt 08.37 gms against Inv No. BG/16-17/037 17/037 Dt:
28/10/2016 To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/038 1,90,000.00 9,70,000.00 Dr Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,87,747.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,253.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales Pendant
-PD8585(3) PD8585(3) Diamond 0.42 Cts, Pearls 12.55 cts, Gold Wt 04.09 gms against Inv No. BG 16-17-038 038 Dt:
28/10/2016.
To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/039 1,95,000.00 11,65,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery)
Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Nose Pin 11(1)
Diamond 2.05 Cts,
Ruby 0.25 cts, Gold
Wt 00.77 gms against
Inv No. BG/16-
BG/16
17/039 Dt:
28/10/2016
To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/040 1,95,000.00 13,60,000.00 Dr
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 8
ITA No. 737/MUM/2024
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Pendant-8585(4)
8585(4)
Diamond 0.40 Cts,
Pearls 11.80ts, Gold
Wt 04.05 gms against
Inv No. BG 16-17-040
040
Dt: 28/10/2016.
To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/041 1,92,000.00 15,52,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,89,723.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,277.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Earrings -ER
ER
-8171(2)
8171(2) Diamond
0.21 Cts, Rubies
03.05ts, Emaralds
3.74 cts, Gold Wt
08.40 gms against Inv
No. BG/16-17/041
17/041
Dt: 28/10 /2016.
To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/042 1,95,000.00 17,47,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Cuff Link Cuff
-34(1)
34(1) Diamond 2.99
Cts, Black Oneyx 6.38
cts, Gold Wt 10.57
gms against Inv No.
BG /16-17/042
17/042 Dt:
28/10/2016
To (as per details) Sales Sales BG/16-17/043 1,92,000.00 19,29,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,89,723.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,277.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales ER-8171(3)
8171(3)
Diamond 0.20 Cts, Cts
Rubies 3.04 cts,
Emeralds 3.62 Cts,
Gold Wt 08.30 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/043
17/043 Dt:
28/10 /2016.
19,43,500.00 4,500.00
Carried Over
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP Cash Book : 1-Apr-2016 to 31-Mar-2017 2017 Date Particulars Vch Type Vch No. Debit Credit Balance Brought Forward 19,43,500.00 4,500.00 28-10-2016 To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/044 1,93,000.00 21,32,000.00 Dr Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,90,711.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,289.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales Ring-5503(1) 5503(1) Diamond 0.12 Cts, Rubies 3.07 cts, Emeralds 3.69 Cts, Gold Wt 8.860 gms against Inv No. BG/16-17/044t:
28/10/2016.
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/045 1,95,000.00 23,27,000.00 Dr Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 9 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales Pendant Pendant-
8585(5) Diamond 0.48
Cts, Pearls 12.35cts,
Gold Wt 4.510 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/045
17/045 Dt:
28/10/2016.
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/046 1,94,000.00 25,21,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,91,700.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,300.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales ER-8171(4)
8171(4)
Diamond 0.22 Cts,
Rubies 3.125cts,
Emeralds 3.69 Cts,
Gold Wt 8.37 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/046
17/046 Dt:
28/10/2016
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/047 1,95,000.00 27,16,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Earing -5184(5)
5184(5)
Diamond 2.71 Cts,
Gold Wt 4.96 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/047
17/047 Dt:
28/10 /2016.
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/048 1,95,000.00 29,11,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,92,688.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,312.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Er-8171(5)
8171(5)
Diamond 0.21 Cts,
Rubies 3.10 Cts,
Emeralds 3.65 Cts,
Gold Wt 8.45 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-17/048
17/048 Dt:
28/10 /2016.
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/049 1,92,000.00 31,03,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,89,723.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,277.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Diamond 0.12
Cts, Rubies 3.07 Cts,
Emeralds 3.69 Cts,
Gold Wt 8.86 gms
against Inv No.
BG/16-1717 /049 Dt:
28/10/2016
To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/050 1,93,000.00 32,96,000.00 Dr
Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,90,711.00 Cr
Mvat Sales 1.20% 2,289.00 Cr
Being cash Jewellery
Sales Earring Er-
Er
8171 (6) Diamond
0.22 Cts,, Rubies 3.12
Cts, Emeralds 3.69
Cts, Gold Wt 8.37
gms against Inv No.
Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 10 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 BG/16-17/050 17/050 Dt:
28/10/2016 Carried Over 33,00,500.00 4,500.00 Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP Date Particulars Vch Type VcH No. Debit Credit Balance Brought Forward 33,00,500.00 4,500,00 28-10-2026 To (as per details) Sales BG/16-17/05 1,54,00.00 34,50,000.00 Dr Net Sales (Jewellery) 1,52,174.00 Cr Mvat Sales 1.20% 1,826.00 Cr Being cash Jewellery Sales Ring RG RG-5503(
4) Diamond 0.10 Cts. Rubles 1.72 Cts, Emeralds 3.54 Cts, Gold Wt. 7.75. gms Against Inv No. BG/16-17/051 BG/16 Dt: 28/10/2026 By Closing balance 34,54,500.00 4,500 34,50,000.00 34,54,500.00 34,54,500.00 34,50,000.00
6. The explanation in relation to the cash deposit of ₹ of the assessee has not been found to be satisfactory by 34,50,000/-of the Assessing Officer and therefore he treated the credit in books of accounts corresponding to cash deposit of ₹ 34,50,000/-as unexplained cash credit in terms of section 68 of the Act.
A Therefore, the issue in dispute precipitated before us is whether the cash sales shown by the assessee in its books of accounts on 28/10/2016, amounting to ₹ 34,50, 34,50,000/-to to explain the source of the cash deposits are genuine or not.
7. We find that firstly irstly, the he Assessing Officer held the cash sales as source of cash deposits as unexplained for the reason that all the Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 11 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 cash sales of ₹ 34,50,000/-has 34,50, has been booked in the books of accounts on 28/10/2016 i.e. one date and no other cash sales are appearing in the books books of accounts either prior or after this date, which according to the Assessing Officer was not believable in normal course of conduct of business. The learned counsel for assessee however has explained that the firm was constituted only ssessment year, having sales of ₹ 136.19 lakhs in the preceding assessment and no long history of sales for comparison with the sales for the year under consideration. He further explained that those cash sales of ₹ 34,50,000/ 000/-was was made on 28/10/2016 in view of the 'Diwali' festival. He also explained that said cash sales of Rs. 34,50, constituted 1.74% of the total turnover of ₹ 1978.87 lakhs 000/-constituted during the year.. According to the learned counsel for assessee cash sales being included in the total turnover of the assessee for the value added tax (VAT) as year under consideration, sales offered to value-added per the invoices issued and the assessee paid tax liability and no loss has been caused to the coffers of the revenue either VAT or tax, hence, the source of the deposit of ₹ 34,50,000/- Income-tax, stands explained.
7.1 Secondly,, the Assessing Officer noticed that all the cash sales were below ₹ 2 lakhs but aggregate of which being more than ₹ 2 has not complied to Rule 114E of Income-tax lakhs,, the assessee has Income rules, 1962, according to which the assessee was required to report cash transactions exceeding the specified sum of ₹ 2 lakh for sale of Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 12 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 the goods or services. However the assesse assesseee referred to Central axes (CBDT), circular dated 22/12/2016 Board of Direct Taxes 22/12 and submitted that said limit was applicable for each transaction and not on aggregate cash sales, and therefore, there was no requirement for reporting such cash sales under rule 115E of Income ncome tax rules,1962.
7.2 Thirdly, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that all the comparative details of cash deposit and cash sales, copy of cash memo in respect of cash sales, ledger account of purchases corresponding to the cash sales, stock of finished goods for the corresponding to the assessment year under entire previous year corresponding consideration, copy of cash book was filed before the lower authorities, but the Ld. CIT(A) recorded incorrectly that no cash book for the period was filed and he sustained the addition for this reason.
7.3 In view of observation of the facts in the case of the assessee, we are of the opinion that the only basis for treating the cash deposit as unexplained cash credit by the Assessing Officer is cash sales recorded in the books of accounts immediately prior to t the monetization period as compared to no cash sales either before or demonetization after that period. Therefore the addition has been mainly on the non genuine. In our opinion suspicion that cash sales are bogus or non-genuine. just because no other cash sales were recorded in the previous year, it cannot be presumed that such cash sales made in the year Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 13 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 under consideration are bogus. The Assessing Officer has ignored the fact that cash sales are out of stock genuinely held and acquired by the assessee through purchase invoices, which were duly produced before the Assessing Officer, but same were not could not controvert the copy doubted by him. The learned DR also could of purchases corresponding to the sales and stock register, filed by ssessing Officer the assessee in the paper book. Probably, the Assessing suspected on the cash sales for the reason that same are below ₹ 2 lakhs and made on the same date, however in our opinion in view of the festival season of 'Diwali',, such cash sales cannot be ruled out unless proved to be otherwise. It is for the Assessing Officer to bring s to support his allegations. The finding of the on record evidences Assessing Officer is based on the merely suspicion and no documentary evidence have been brought on record by the Assessing Officer to establish that such such cash sales were not how ever strong, cannot take genuine. In our opinion, suspicion, howsoever place of the evidences. Similar finding has been given by the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal in the case of Alchemist ITA No. 1689/Del/2022, Touchnology Vs ACIT in .ITA 1689/Del/2022 which is reproduced as under:
"10.
10. We find that from perusal of the records, there is no evidence sent shown in the hard disk is to prove that the „amounts sent‟ actually amounts sent by assessee company in hawala route which had ultimately found its way in the form of share capital and share premium under FDI route. The revenue had completely addressed this issue and made an addition purely on suspicion and surmise without any basis thereby making the addition totally unsustainable in the eyes of law. On the contrary, contrar the Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 14 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 assessee had stated that LGF had sent 19500000 USD from Cyprus and after deduction of LC charges and other overseas bank charges , the assessee could ultimately receive only 18621973.93 USD equivalent to Rs 100 crores in India under FDI route as sharere capital and share premium. In support of this, the assessee had duly provided all the necessary documents as listed above. The assessee from the inception had always taken the stand that it had not sent any monies abroad in hawala route. The assessee cannot cannot be asked to prove the negative. It is for the revenue to prove the same with cogent evidences, which is not done in the instant case. We find that the revenue had merely proceeded to make the addition on suspicion. It is trite law that howsoever strong would not partake the character of suspicion howsoever legal evidence and hence a greater onus is casted on the revenue to bring on record cogent evidences to justify its suspicion, which is conspicuously absent in the instant case. The only material d upon by the revenue is the hard disk seized during that is relied search which only contained Page | 9 Alchemist Touchnology the sent and „amounts received‟.. Nowhere the details of „amounts sent‟ said material even suggested that the amounts were sent by assessee company in illegal route which in turn had surfaced back in the form of share capital and premium under FDI route from Cyprus. Though the presumption u/s 292C of the Act would go in favour of the revenue, it cann ot be brushed aside that the cannot said presumption is a rebuttable presumption and assessee had duly discharged its onus on the same. Moreover, the present assessee herein is an assessee proceeded u/s 153C of the Act and hence it is all the more necessary for the revenue to arrive at the satisfaction that income or materials or documents does not belong or pertain to the searched person and indeed belongs to third person (i.e 153C assessee). Viewed from thithis s angle, it could be safely concluded that presumption u/s 292C of the Act would apply only to the person proceeded u/s 153A of the Act and not for the assessee u/s 153C of the Act."
7.4 In view of facts of instant case, respectfully, following the coordinate bench (supra), we reject the finding of the lower assessee are not genuine. Once authorities that cash sales of the asses the cash sales are accepted to be genuine, the cash received thereon and later deposited into bank account by crediting cred the cash and debiting ting the bank account satisfactorily explain the credit entry in the books of accounts and therefore no addition in terms of Bina Goenka The Jeweller LLP 15 ITA No. 737/MUM/2024 section 68 of the Act ct is warranted for corresponding cash deposit of ₹ 34,50,000/-in in the case of the assessee. The ground Nos. 2 to 4 of the appeal of the assessee accordingly allowed.
8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced nounced in the open Court on 23/09/2024.
/09/2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
Sd/
(SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
KARHAIL) OM PRAKASH KANT)
(OM KANT
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai;
Dated: 23/09/2024
Dragon Legal/Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.
BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai