Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 696 - ITAT DELHIAddition u/s 68 - cash deposit - depositor is one of the directors of the company - As per AO assessee has to not only establish the identity of the source but also establish at least prima facie the capacity of such source and genuineness of the transaction - HELD THAT:- Merely pointing out to the source and the source admitting that it had made the payments is not sufficient to discharge the burden placed on the assessee by Section 68 - To discharge the burden which Section 68 casts upon the assessee, at least some plausible explanation is required to be furnished, which must be backed by some reliable evidence. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, the bank statement which have been reproduced by the CIT(A) in his order has given a finding that for A.Y. 2015-16 assessee had filed return of income of Rs.9,05,220/- which could not explain the source of its deposit of Rs.51,00,000/-. He has further given a finding that for the cash deposit of Rs.27,50,000/- no reasonable explanation was furnished by the assessee and the summons issued to Hitesh Bhatia was not complied with. Before us, no fallacy in the findings of CIT(A) has been pointed out by assessee - if the circumstances required u/s 68 and the findings of CIT(A) are taken into consideration, then in the present case we are of the view that the assessee has not discharged the burden which was cast u/s 68 - In such a situation, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus the grounds of assessee are dismissed.
|