Ratika Kumbhat Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that amount of sundry debtor recorded in books of account are not any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and hence doesn’t qualify as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, appeal allowed and addition u/s. 69A deleted.
Facts- During the assessment proceedings, AO noted that the assessee had shown debtors amounting to Rs. 12,00,000/- for whom no documentary evidence was submitted by the assessee. AO noted that the assessee did not prove the genuineness of such cash debtors, and drew an inference that amount represented assessee’s own capital and she had given the colour of debtors so that the story of cash deposited during demonetization might be explained. Thus, AO made the addition of those debtors, for an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/-, as bogus, and considered assessee’s own capital. Accordingly, he taxed that amount u/s 69A in the hands of the assessee.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion-
Held that as it is the amount of the sundry debtor already recorded in the books of account are not any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article therefore, considering that fact provision of section 69A of the Act is not applicable.
