TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has shown the withdrawal of the same. Further, the facts regarding addition of Rs.11 lakhs made for the earlier years and the fact that the assessee had shown as having withdrawn the amount, has not been disputed by the Revenue. Addition made in the earlier years will be available for investment in the current year. The department has not produced any proof regarding utilisation of that amount for any other purpose. Hence, amounts added for the earlier years and shown as having been withdrawn in the books should be considered as being available for investment in the current year – Decided against the Revenue. - ITA No.1342/Hyd/2008, ITA No.1343/Hyd/2008, ITA No.1344/Hyd/2008 - - - Dated:- 4-9-2013 - Shri Chandra Poojari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dition of Rs.23,00,000/- for the assessment year 2000-01 which was drawn within the same financial veer and was available for investment in the subsequent financial years. The assessing officer without taking into account this fact made two additions in the year 2002-03 in this individual hands and HUF amounting to Rs.10,00,000 and Rs.13,28,333.44. It is submitted that in case the addition of Rs. 23,00,000 is upheld then it is an undisputed fact that the amount was withdrawn and available for investment in subsequent year "as there is no other evidence to say that this amount is otherwise not available for investment. Hence this amount should be telescoped to the subsequent additions in the hand of his individual and HUF and the same should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is no cash balance to explain the source of deposits in M/s. Gayatri Trading Company along with investment of Rs.13,28,333/- by Shri Anantula Janardhan (Individual) in M/s. SVMDM. The CIT(A) discussed elaborately at pages 4 and 5 of his order and concluded that the source of investment in M/s Gayatri Trading Company stands explained being entitled to be telescoping the addition of Rs. 23 lakhs and hence, the addition made by the Assessing Officer is deleted. 6. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before us. We find that the sum of Rs. 23 lakhs was added in the hands of the assessee as unexplained investment in Gayatri Trading Company for the assessment year 2000-2001. It is also not disputed that the money was withdrawn from Gayatri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidering various drawing from firm have been considered to explain the various investments made by Sri A. Janardhan in his individual as well as HUF capacity in the second set of books. The assessing officer without accepting this made addition of Rs.23,00,000/- for the assessment year 2000-01 which was drawn within the same financial year and was available for investment in the subsequent financial years. The assessing officer without taking into account this fact made two additions in the year 2002-03 in this individual hands and HUF amounting to Rs.10,00,000 and Rs.13,28,333.44. It is submitted that in case the addition of Rs. 23,00,000 is upheld then it is an undisputed fact that the amount was withdrawn and available for investment in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal before us. 12. We have heard both parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the decision of the CIT(A) is based on the facts and or available statement given by the assessee to the effect that the cash flow statement has been given for both 'Individual' as well as 'HUF'. The department has not adduced any evidence for utilisation of the monies withdrawn for any other purpose or has not disproved the cash flow statement given by the assessee, except making general statement that money withdrawn was utilised for other purposes. The department has not specifically counted the cash flow statement filed by the assessee and accepted by the CIT(A). In these circumstances, we uphold the Order of the CIT(A) and delete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dit. It was submitted that since income has been offered under section 132(4) for a sum of Rs. 11 lakhs and have been withdrawn in the same years, the same is available for investment in subsequent years. It was submitted that there is no evidence that cash credits offered for tax and withdrawn from the accounts have been used for any other purpose. Hence, this amount should be considered as available for investment during the current year. 16. Accepting the arguments of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) held at para 04.2 of his order as under : "The undisclosed investment with M/s. Venkateswara Modern Dall Mill is Rs.6,24,479, which is less than the income offered u/s. 132(4) of the I.T. Act. Accordingly, the source of investment for Rs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
