TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1678X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat assessee had explained during the course of assessment proceedings that cash was withdrawn with the intention to buy some properly. The Ld. CIT(A) has categorically observed that actual amount of cash required in these circumstances would be known to the assessee only. He has also stated that there is no bar in keeping the cash at home according to requirements. Thus, observations of the Ld. CIT(A) are correct and, therefore, we do not see any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). The question involved in this case is of facts and the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly appreciated the facts of the case and decided the issue correctly. - Appeal of the Revenue dismissed. - ITA No. 180/Chd/2013 - - - Dated:- 3-11-2015 - H. L. Karwa (Vice Presiden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es with ICICI Bank, Ludhiana The Assessing officer while framing the assessment, has nowhere discussed about the above documentary evidence furnished by the assessee and added a sum of ₹ 19.60 lakhs as income from undisclosed sources. 3. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the addition, observing as under:- As per the cash flow statement submitted by the appellant, the cash-in-hand available with the appellant as on 31.03.2007 was ₹ 13,48,638/-. In this regard the appellant had submitted that he had taken a loan of ₹ 20.00 lacs from Centurion Bank of Punjab against mortgage of residential house owned by the appellant. Out of this loan of ₹ 20.00 lacs the appellant had withdrawn ₹ 12,25,000/- on 05.02.2007 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lacs made in the month of October, 2007 and after some minor adjustments the total cash available on 1M November, 2007 was ₹ 50,004/-. As per cash flow statement small amounts were withdrawn and deposited thereafter from the bank accounts of the appellant. The cash deposits in the bank accounts of the appellant therefore stand fully explained and the _AO was not justified in holding that the appellant had not discharged his onus to explain the source of these deposits. As discussed above the copy of bank accounts, cash flow statement and the Balance sheet as on 31.03.2007 and 31.03.2008 were duly filed before the AO. All the entries in the cash flow statement were duly recorded from the bank accounts and represented the various cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .07.2007 and if it was not required by the appellant the same should have been deposited in the bank in one go rather than in parts from 14.07.2007 to 15.11.2007. Perusal of the cash flow statement reveals that out of the cash available of ₹ 17,44,004/- on 11.07.2007 deposits of ₹ 16.50 lacs were made on 13.07.2007, 31.07.2007 and 07.08.2007 i.e. within the period of 25 days. Thereafter the total amount of cash deposits and withdrawals are not very significant. This observation of the AO is also without any basis. 4.10 The AO also pointed out that the appellant gave interest free loans of ₹ 10.00 lacs and ₹ 5.00 lacs to Smt. Kamla Jain on 01.08.2007 and 09.08.2007. Smt. Kamla Jain is sister of the appellant and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee on 31.3.2007 was ₹ 13,48,638/-. It is stated that the cash available on the aforesaid date was out of withdrawals made from ICICI bank wherein the deposits before withdrawals were made after taking loan of ₹ 20 lakhs from Centurion bank of Punjab against mortgage of residential house owned by the assessee. As regards the propose of withdrawals, it was explained that cash was withdrawn with the intention to buy some property and since the property was not purchased upto 31.3.2007, the cash was available with the assessee. Finally, the assessee deposited the same in the bank account during the year under consideration. It is relevant to observe here that Ld. CIT(A) has given the details of withdrawals and deposits in the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade the observation that in the case the assessee was actually having cash in hand of ₹ 13,48,638/- as on 1.4.2007, there was hardly any reason for making further cash withdrawals. The Ld. CIT(A) has correctly held that this observation of the Assessing officer is without any basis. The Ld. CIT(A) further observed that assessee had explained during the course of assessment proceedings that cash was withdrawn with the intention to buy some properly. The Ld. CIT(A) has categorically observed that actual amount of cash required in these circumstances would be known to the assessee only. He has also stated that there is no bar in keeping the cash at home according to requirements. Thus, observations of the Ld. CIT(A) are correct and, ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
