TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts. It could be cross verified with the bank statements along with the disclosure of facts that this amount was received on account of sale proceeds of the hotel etc. In absence of complete information, assessing officer has to make an inquiry. Thus the assessing officer has concrete information which enable him to form an opinion that income has escaped assessment. Against assessee. CIT(A) deleted the addition - cash deposited in cash in two bank accounts - Held that:- The assessee has explained the source in this case. The grievance of the AO is, why he has not deposited the amount in the bank on the date of receipt itself is too be hyper technical in his approach, once assessee has demonstrated the availability of cash in hand more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 it is challenging deletion of interest u/s 234B of the Income Tax Act. 4. First we take the appeal of assessee, the brief facts are that assessee is an individual he has filed his return of income declaring an income of Rs.2,96,246/-, this return appears to have been accepted u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer had received an information from the investigation wing that assessee is maintaining two bank accounts bearing no. 7222 with Canara Bank, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi, and Saving Bank account no. 119057 with bank of Rajasthan, Kailash Colony, New Delhi. The assessee has deposited a sum of Rs.4,04,750/- in Canara Bank and Rs.23,20,000/- in Bank of Rajasthan. These amounts were deposited in cash. Armed with this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y reasons rather merely on certain informations which have not been conclusively gone through by the assessing officer. 7. On the other hand ld. DR relied upon the order of ld.CIT (A). 8. We have duly considered the rival contention and gone through the record carefully. The basic contention raised by the ld. counsel for the assessee is that in the reasons assessing officer has only made a reference to the information received from the investigation wing, he has not shown as to how an income can be said to have escaped. During the course of hearing we have put a query to the ld. counsel for the assessee that, whether assessee has annexed the copy of the bank statement with the return or made any note on the computation of income showing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e explanation of the assessee about the source of deposits in the Canara Bank. He did not make any addition. With regard to the cash deposit of Rs.23,20,000/-, it was contended by the assessee that he had entered into an agreement to sell the Hotel Karan Palace and he had received the cash of Rs.25 lac on following dates:- 27-06-2002 8,00,000/- 20-07-2002 5,00,000/- 01-08-2002 10,50,000/- 19-08-2002 1,50,000/- 10. The assessing officer has reproduced the bank statement from 7.8.2002 upto 17.3.2003, it is noticed from the statement that on 16 occasions amounts ranging from Rs.30,000/- to 5,00,000/- were deposited in this bank account totaling to Rs.23,20,000/-. The ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been admitting payment of Rs.25 lacs to the assessee for which he has filed suit for recovery. Thus a sum of Rs.25 lac was available with the assessee. Section 68 of the income tax contemplates that where any sum found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the ld. AO satisfactory, the sums so credited may be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that previous year. The assessee has explained the source. The grievance of the assessing officer is, why he has not deposited the amount in the bank on the date of receipt itself. To our mind the ld. AO is too be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
