Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (5) TMI 229 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of credits in bank account - Allegation that, assessee failed to discharge the burden of proof by not establishing the genuineness of credits in the bank account - CIT(A) deleted part addition considering the past savings - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) considered the past savings but did not appreciate the explanation of the assessee that he was working in the Government Health Department since 02.9.1997 as an Assistant Surgeon and the credits are from the rotational fund - credit entries regarding the cancellation of DD purchased for share trading, clearing of cheque no.143176 and IDBI Infrastructure Bonds purchased by the assessee in earlier years have not been considered by the CIT(A), which is not justified because the assessee has explained the nature of credit entries. Direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition on account of cash credits in bank account. Ground no.1 raised by the assessee is allowed. Addition on account of interest on FDR - HELD THAT:- AO himself noted in the assessment order that FDRs relate to earlier years, therefore, find force in the contention of the assessee that the major part of interest earned on maturity value of FDRs pertains to previous years, which should not be added in the present year. Direct the AO to delete the addition in respect of interest earned on previous years and restrict the addition to the year under consideration if the same is not part of return of income for the present year. Accordingly, ground no.2 raised by the assessee is partly allowed. Addition on account of private practice - AO made addition noting that the assessee could not prove the credit entry made in the bank account - CIT(A) confirmed the same on the ground that the assessee is a Surgeon and receiving fees from private practice - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) noted in the order that the assessee is a Surgeon and receiving fees from private practice. Perusal of assessment order and impugned orders shows that no corroborative evidence was brought on record by the Revenue Authorities in this regard. CIT(A) on presumptive basis sustained the addition, which is not justified. Thus, direct the AO to delete the addition. Unexplained investment in shares and mutual fund - CIT(A) held that the AO was not justified in making the addition of the income on account of profit on share trading pertaining to wife of the assessee - HELD THAT:- Investment was not deleted on the ground that the initial burden was not discharged by the assessee. CIT(A) himself has considered the fact that the wife of the assessee has profit on share trading and accordingly deleted the addition, therefore, the initial burden had been discharged by the assessee. CIT(A) should also have deleted the addition on account of investment - direct the AO to delete the addition. Ground no.4 raised in the assessee’s appeal is allowed.
|