Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1188 - ITAT AMRITSARRevision u/s 263 - source of cash deposits in his bank account/s - CIT observed that no proper enquiry can be said to have been made by the AO, who completed the assessment in haste, and without proper application of mind. - Held that:- No satisfactory answer to any of the foregoing was forthcoming even before us, even as, as explained, it is the non-enquiry by the AO that is the relevant or material. The withdrawal of petty amounts, despite abundant cash-in-hand, only points out to the cash flow statement being not correct or complete, requiring further verification. There is no finding by the AO on this. In fact, the affidavit from Sh. Yash Pal states of his having withdrawn the amount, though unable to purchase the vehicle arranged by the assessee for him. That is, the money was withdrawn by him on own account and not for and on behalf of the assessee. The version before the AO was clearly different. The third area of enquiry, as pointed out by the ld. Pr. CIT, is most striking. This is as, again, without doubt, purchase of a second-hand car is not generally paid for in advance. It could no doubt be so in a particular case, as where the vehicle is identified, and the proposed buyer apprehends loss of opportunity on account of the car dealer (middle-man) not having enough funds to purchase the vehicle. That is, an advance to facilitate the purchase, closing the deal, while in the instant case the purchase remains pending for over eleven months from the date of advance! Further still, the advance of Sh. Rajan Ghai has not been adjusted against any car purchased by him, but against that by his brother Sh. Gagan Ghai, i.e., as explained. The explanation, on the very face of it, is unconvincing and needs further enquiry, which is what the ld. Pr. CIT has directed. Decision of CIT sustained - Decided against the assessee.
|