Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (3) TMI 171 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

2016 (3) TMI 171 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - [2015] 44 ITR (Trib) 135 (ITAT [Ahm]) - Undisclosed cash deposited to the bank - income from undisclosed sources - Held that:- We find merit in the contention of assessee that there is no dispute that the amount which was withdrawn by the assessee on various dates during the year 2006 was available with him for making deposits. In the absence of finding that the amount which was previously withdrawn by the assessee had been utilised for any other purpose merel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

thority to make the addition on the basis that the assessee failed to explain the source of deposits. Moreover, the authorities below have not disputed the fact that the assessee had withdrawn an amount of ₹ 9,10,000 before the deposits made on various dates during the financial year 2007-08. Therefore, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition - Decided in favour of assessee - I. T. A. No. 788 /Ahd/ 2012 (assessment year .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal : 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer of ₹ 10,44,800 being amount of cash deposited to the bank considering the same as income from undisclosed sources which is requested to be quashed. Your appellant prays for leave to add, to alter and/or to amend the above ground before the final hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the case of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ount. The explanation of the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Officer on the ground that the case was withdrawn in the first week of July-2006, whereas the deposits were in the month of June-2007. Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who after considering the submissions, reduced the addition to the extent of ₹ 10,44,800. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

refore, established. He submitted that the cash book reveals the clear positive balance out of which the cash has been deposited but the authorities below failed to appreciate the fact. He submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in following the ratio laid down by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC). He submitted that in the present case, there are direct evidences demonstrating that the assessee was having cash b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

dia Ltd. [1999] 240 ITR 672 (Delhi). 4. On the contrary, the senior Departmental representative supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the explanation as furnished by the assessee caused doubt as is evident from the fact that the cash was withdrawn on various dates (i.e., July 1, 2006, July 6, 2006 and June 26, 2007) during the years 2006 and 2007. However, the cash was deposited in the years 2007 and 2008. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material av .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cember 14, 2007 and ₹ 2,00,000 on January 7, 2008. However, the cash was deposited on June 7, 2007 of ₹ 2 lakhs, on June 8, 2007 of ₹ 2 lakhs, on June 11, 2007 of ₹ 1,50,000, on June 12, 2007 of ₹ 2 lakhs, on June 13, 2007 of ₹ 2,25,000. The total deposits till June 13, 2007 was of ₹ 9,75,000 and the amount withdrawn till July 6, 2006 was of ₹ 9,10,000 (Rs. 4,20,000 + 4,90,000). Rest of the deposits of the total addition were made on June 18, 2007, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

concerned, i.e., matching from withdrawals and deposits and rest of the amount, there is a gap between withdrawals and deposits of the amount. In respect of deposit made on February 13, 2008 is also within one month from the withdrawal of amount on January 7, 2008. In respect of other entries, the cash withdrawal is even before one year of deposit of the amount. The contention of the assessee is that the amount was kept as cash in hand. The authorities have doubted about the explanation furnishe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version