9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s by him during the year under consideration in his aforesaid bank account with Canara Bank - we scale down the addition made/sustained by the lower authorities to an amount of Rs.13,50,000/-[ Rs.17 lac (-) Rs.3.50 lac]. - Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. - ITA No. 153/RPR/2022 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2023 - Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal Smt. Laxmi Sharma, CAs For the Revenue : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.06.2022, which in turn arises from the order passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny u/s. 143(2) of the Act. During the course of the assessment proceedings, it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had during the demonetization period made cash deposits of Rs.17 lac in his bank account, as under: Date of deposit Amount 16/11/2016 900000 17/11/2016 400000 18/11/2016 400000 On being queried about the source of the aforesaid cash deposits made during the demonetization period, it was submitted by the assessee that the same were sourced out of his salary income a/w. income from other sources. In support of his a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lac which was withdrawn by him from his bank account in the year 2014 a/w. other balance cash in hand available with him, were utilized for making cash deposits of Rs.17 lac (supra) in his bank account during the demonetization period, but the said claim of the assessee did not find favour with the A.O. Holding a conviction that the assessee had failed to come forth with any explanation as regards the cash deposits of Rs.17 lac made by him in his bank account, the A.O made an addition of the entire amount u/s.69 of the Act. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals) but without any success. 7. The assessee being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals) has carried the matter in appeal before me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a/w. those of the preceding two years, but the A.O holding a conviction that it was impractical and beyond comprehension that the assessee would have retained the said amount with him for two years (approx.), thus, was not inclined to accept his said explanation. 10. I have given thoughtful consideration to the issue in hand and is unable to fully subscribe to the explanation of the assessee as regards the source of the cash deposits in his bank account. Although, it is beyond comprehension that any person would withdraw substantial amount of Rs.15.25 lac (supra) from his bank account for the purpose of keeping it at home and re-deposit the same after a gap of two years in the same account. At the same time I am also not able to subscrib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the aforesaid cash withdrawals of Rs.15.25 lac a/w. cash in hand that would have been available with the assessee, a salaried person both out of his savings and current years income, it can safely be held that an amount of Rs.3 lac (out of cash withdrawals of Rs.6,25,000/- made by the assessee on 30.08.2014) and Rs.50,000/- (out of cash in hand available with him from his savings account and current years income) could safely be held to have been available with him for making the cash deposits by him during the year under consideration in his aforesaid bank account with Canara Bank, Branch : Telibandha, Raipur. I, thus, in terms of my aforesaid observations scale down the addition made/sustained by the lower authorities to an amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
