Yogesh Kumar U.S. ORDER
Yogesh Kumar U.S., Member (J)
1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as CIT (Appeals)] dated 10.07.2019 for assessment year 2017-18.
2. The substantive grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are as under:-
"1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in totally deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on account of unexplained money u/s. 69A on the ground that (i) the cash seized belongs to the Assessee's imprest fund meant for normal course of its business; and (ii) the cash transaction is covered under sub-section (e), (f) and (g) of Rule 6DD of Income Tax without appreciating the fact that such transaction of cash through imprest account has never taken place in the past in its cash book which can prove cash purchases of raw materials, wheat straw.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in totally deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on account of unexplained money U/s. 69A on the ground that the same was duly recorded in the books of account and addition u/s. 69A of the Act can only be made when the assessee is found to be in possession of money bullion, jewellery, etc, not recorded in his books of account without appreciating the fact that recording of the transaction in cash book was an afterthought exercise to make the cash appear to be from genuine source.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in totally deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- on account of unexplained money u/s. 69A on the ground that applicability of section 40A(3) has to be without appreciating the fact that addition was made u/s. 69A and not u/s. 40A(2) of the Act.
3. There is a delay of 154 days in filing the present appeal by the Revenue. The Revenue has pleaded that the delay in filing of appeal caused 'due to inadvertent mistake in calculation of tax effect while allowing the relief as per the decision of CIT(A), the appeal was not to be filed in view of monetary limit laid down by the CBDT. Later, it was found that there was mistake in calculation of tax effect and the same has been corrected'. Therefore, the delay has been caused in filing the appeal which is not willful default but bonafide mistake. For the reasons stated in the application for condoning the delay, the delay of 154 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
4. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee was engaged in manufacturing and trading of paper and paper board. The assessee filed return of income declaring 'NIL' income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the assessee revised the return of income again declared 'NIL' income. The case of the assessee was selected under CASS for complete scrutiny. The assessment proceedings initiated against the assessee, the representative of the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings. The assessment order came to be passed on 17/12/2018 by making an addition of Rs. 1 crore seized from one Mr. Pankaj Goel on 05/06/2016 which is found to be unaccounted cash of the assessee company. Accordingly, the said cash has been treated as unexplained money and added to the Assessee's total income u/s. 69A of the Act. Further, the Ld. A.O. made disallowance of Rs. 6,23,081........