Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (3) TMI 311 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Unexplained deposit of cash during the financial year - HELD THAT:- Explanation were furnished in the context of specific notices issued by the AO calling for the explanation in support of cash deposit and the AO has examined the said explanations and has further carried out verification from the banks and after examining earlier years tax returns, has accepted the same in support of cash availability at the beginning of the year and deposit therefrom during the demonization period. We therefore find that the matter relating to source of cash deposits during the demonization period has been duly examined by the AO and he has taken all requisite steps calling for explanation from the assessee, issuing further notices where the earlier explanation was not acceptable and calling for further information and after carrying out independent examination from past year tax returns available on department's IT Portal and calling from the information from the bank has accepted the said explanation so furnished by the assessee. Amounts received by the assessee, pursuant to comprise and settlement as per various Courts orders, PCIT has accepted the fact that these Court orders are on record and the compensation amount as so stated therein and the parties to the compensation are thus not disputed. However, for the reason that the exact date of receipt of compensation is not discernable, the explanation of the assessee has been negated. We find that the date of the Court's order are clearly discernable from the records and one of the such order is dated 24/12/2015 and it can reasonably be presumed that the amount has been received by the assessee within a reasonable period pursuant to such Court order during the financial year 2015-16 in absence of any evidence that such Court order has not been honoured and complied with by the other party and which is not the case of the Revenue either. Regarding other receipts on maturity of insurance policies, sale of land etc, the factum of these transactions and necessary evidence on record has not been disputed by the ld. PCIT - Only reason why the ld. PCIT has not accepted the explanation of the assessee is that it is against human probability that the assessee would be keeping huge cash-in-hand for such long period of time and no evidence has been furnished. In this regard, we believe that the human probability has to be seen in context of surrounding circumstances of the assessee prevalent at the relevant point in time and a reasonable inference has to be drawn. In context of present assessee, after the death of her husband, the assessee was undergoing a difficult phase in her personal life and it must have took her time to gain understanding of business and financial dealings of her late husband, thereafter she took steps to recover money advanced to various parties by her husband, the cases were filed before the Courts and compromise/settlement reached and pursuant thereto, she has recovered the amount advanced by her late husband. Further, the trauma and pain in her life got further aggravated on account of divorce proceedings of her daughter. In the said background, if we see the assessee's explanation, we find that she has sufficiently explained and demonstrated the availability of cash which she kept in her possession instead of depositing the same with bank or any other relative/third party and thus, she has discharges the initial onus placed on her. Thus we are of the considered view that the matter has been duly examined by the AO and the assessment order so passed by him cannot be held as erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Decided in favour of assessee.
|