2025 (6) TMI 1857 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 69A - undisclosed income of the assessee - unexplained cash deposits in bank - HELD THAT - Upon examination we find that out of the total cash deposit the assessee had already offered Rs. 30, 00, 000/- to tax in the return of income. Further the cash book clearly evidences that the assessee had adequate cash balance to support the bank deposits. While the Ld. DR advanced arguments no specific objection was raised against the factual submissions made by the assessee. We find merit in the contentions of the assessee. Accordingly the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby deleted. It is further noted that the revenue has not preferred any appeal against the portion of the addition deleted by the CIT(A). Assessee appeal allowed.

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal questions considered by the Tribunal in this appeal are:

(a) Whether the addition of Rs. 49,35,000/- as unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was justified, given the assessee's explanation and disclosure in the return of income;

(b) Whether the interest charged under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D of the Income Tax Act was rightly imposed;

(c) Whether the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271AAC read with section 274 of the Income Tax Act was appropriate;

(d) Any other grounds or amendments raised by the assessee before the hearing.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue (a): Legitimacy of Addition of Cash Deposits under Section 69A

Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, deals with unexplained cash credits and allows the Assessing Officer (AO) to treat unexplained cash deposits as income if the assessee fails to satisfactorily explain the source of such deposits. The burden lies on the assessee to demonstrate the genuineness of the cash deposits.

Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The AO initially treated the cash deposits totaling Rs. 49,35,000/- as unexplained income under section 69A, despite the assessee's claim that Rs. 30,15,045/- was disclosed as income in the return and the remaining Rs. 19,35,000/- represented accumulated cash balance from regular income. The AO noted the assessee's failure to provide details of personal and business cash expenses and suspected the cash deposits were linked to redevelopment transactions, which were not satisfactorily explained.

The CIT(A) partially accepted the assessee's explanation and deleted an addition of Rs. 7,11,344/- but confirmed the remaining addition of Rs. 49,35,000/-. However, the CIT(A) did not consider the assessee's cash book or the disclosure of Rs. 30,00,000/- as agricultural income in the return.

Key Evidence and Findings: The assessee submitted a date-wise cash book and bank statements showing sufficient cash balance to justify the deposits. The assessee also demonstrated that Rs. 30,00,000/- of the deposits had already been disclosed as agricultural income and taxed accordingly. The Tribunal noted that no specific objection was raised by the Department against these factual submissions.

Application of Law to Facts: Given that the assessee had already disclosed a substantial portion of the deposits and provided documentary evidence supporting the source of the remaining cash deposits, the Tribunal found the addition under section 69A to be unjustified. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO and CIT(A) failed to consider the cash book and prior disclosure adequately.

Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Department relied on the AO's assessment and the CIT(A)'s confirmation, highlighting the lack of explanation about cash withdrawals and personal expenses. The assessee countered with documentary evidence and prior tax disclosures. The Tribunal found the assessee's submissions more credible and noted the absence of any specific rebuttal by the Department to the cash book and disclosures.

Conclusion: The Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 49,35,000/- sustained by the CIT(A), holding that the cash deposits were satisfactorily explained and not liable to be taxed as unexplained income under section 69A.

Issue (b): Charging of Interest under Sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D

The assessee challenged the imposition of interest under these provisions, which relate to interest for default in furnishing return of income (234A), interest for default in payment of advance tax (234B), interest for deferment of advance tax (234C), and interest for failure to pay self-assessment tax (234D).

The Tribunal's order does not specifically elaborate on the detailed reasoning regarding these interest charges, nor does it record any separate submissions or findings on this point. Given the deletion of the addition under section 69A, it is implicit that the basis for interest charges related to the disputed addition also falls away.

Accordingly, the Tribunal's allowance of the appeal implicitly negates the interest charges connected to the addition of Rs. 49,35,000/-, although no explicit order on interest is recorded.

Issue (c): Initiation of Penalty Proceedings under Section 271AAC read with Section 274

The AO initiated penalty proceedings for under-reporting of income amounting to Rs. 59,94,000/-, including the cash deposits treated as unexplained income. The assessee challenged this initiation.

The Tribunal's order does not explicitly address the penalty proceedings but by allowing the appeal and deleting the addition of Rs. 49,35,000/-, effectively negates the foundation for penalty under-reporting related to this amount. The absence of any appeal by the Department against the deletion further supports this conclusion.

Issue (d): Other Grounds or Amendments

The assessee reserved the right to add or amend grounds before hearing, but no additional grounds were recorded or considered beyond those stated.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

"Out of the total cash deposit of Rs. 49,35,000/-, the assessee had already offered Rs. 30,00,000/- to tax in the return of income. Further, the cash book clearly evidences that the assessee had adequate cash balance to support the bank deposits."

"While the Ld. DR advanced arguments, no specific objection was raised against the factual submissions made by the assessee. In view of the foregoing, we find merit in the contentions of the assessee. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 49,35,000/- sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby deleted."

Core principles established include the necessity for the revenue authorities to consider all documentary evidence, including cash books and prior disclosures in the return of income, before making additions under section 69A. The burden to prove unexplained cash deposits as income cannot be discharged without negating credible and consistent explanations supported by records.

Final determinations:

(i) The addition of Rs. 49,35,000/- as unexplained income under section 69A is deleted;

(ii) The appeal is allowed in favor of the assessee;

(iii) No appeal was preferred by the revenue against the deletion of other additions or penalty proceedings, implying acceptance of those deletions;

(iv) Interest and penalty issues are implicitly disposed of in light of the deletion of the main addition.