Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (7) TMI 941 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 68 - amounts found deposited in the bank accounts through NEFT amount unexplained - HELD THAT:- We have perused the contents of the Bank account of the assessee as noted that the transactions reflected therein relate majorly to NEFT deposits narrated to be from Prakash Kumar Parmar and withdrawals by way of cheques issued in the name of Canon Capital and Finance, stated to be a Share Broking Firm. Statement of the assessee in Canon Capital and Finance, placed before us at P.B22-29 as evidence, corroborates the fact of cheques issued from her bank account to the firm. These facts have not been controverted by the Revenue. Therefore the contention of the assessee that her bank account reflected transactions on account of share trading only stands established. For deposits in assessee bank account as stated above are narrated in the bank statement as NEFT Prakash Kumar Parmar.Clearly all these deposits have come from transfers made by Mr.Parmar. Thus the facts on record demonstrate the transactions in the bank account as relating to share trading conducted through broker Canon Capital and money for the said purpose when falling short being transferred by one Mr.Prakash Parmar. Coupled with the fact that the assessee was a lady advanced in age ,being 78 years old, with meager means, having returned income of only Rs.99,740/-and stated to have no knowledge of shares, which considering her age and background is highly probable, the assesses explanation rings true that her bank account was being operated by others for conducting share trading transactions. The assessee we find had stated so on oath also. We completely agree with assessee that the assessee had discharged her onus of explaining the source of deposits in her account. Revenue, we hold, wrongly rejected the explanation as not tenable and made addition of the deposits in the hands of the assessee when rightfully the onus had shifted to the Revenue to inquire further into the matter having been given all relevant details of the persons allegedly operating the assesses bank account, including their names, addresses,PAN details. Both the lower authorities having failed to do this exercise, the addition on account of credits in the bank account of the assessee, for which reasonably satisfactory explanation had been given by the assessee duly corroborated with evidences and her own affidavit, could not have been made. Thus we hold, the addition made under section 68 on account credits in her bank account is not sustainable and the same is directed to be deleted. The grounds of the appeal of the assessee are allowed.
|