TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1148
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of by this common judgment. 3. We heard the counsel for the appellants and the Senior Standing Counsel for Revenue. 4. We shall first deal with the appeals filed by Smt.Asha Sunil. I.T.A.No.260 of 2014 pertains to the assessment year 2006-07. The first issue raised for consideration before the Tribunal was with respect to the addition of Rs. 10,43,815/-. The contention raised was that in the absence of search proceedings/search warrant in the case of the appellant, the assessment under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act was illegal. The Tribunal's order itself shows that after verifying the files of the department, the learned representative of the assessee very fairly conceded before it that he was satisfied that there was search in the case of appellant also and, therefore, he withdrew the said contention. 5. The second issue was with respect to the addition of Rs. 3,33,815/- as unexplained credit in the bank account. The contention raised on behalf of the appellant was that the said deposit was made out of the trading receipts from garment business. However, it has been specifically found that the net income returned by the assessee from her garment business was only Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was reiterated before this Court also, was that the appellant's father Shri George Philip is an Air Craft Maintenance Engineer and that from his salary income, he gifted to his daughter, the aforesaid amount. Copy of the bank account statement produced by the assessee clearly showed that the money was transferred from Singapore to India by way of telegraphic transfer and within a day or two, the same was transferred to the assessee's account. However, the manner in which the money was transferred from Singapore to the assessee's father's account in India, could not be explained either before the Tribunal or this Court. Similarly, the role played by Tandon Investment Company, Singapore in this transaction is also a mystery and could not be explained even before us. In fact the evasive submission made was that the assessee's father "might have" transferred his salary from Singapore. 9. In substance, the contention raised before us was that if at all any addition could be made, it should be only in the hands of the assessee's father and not in the hands of the assessee. Before us, the learned counsel for the appellant also placed reliance on Section 56(2) of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the credit of the above amounts to the account of Shri George Philip is a suspicious transaction reported by the Bank to the Financial Intelligence Unit, Ministry of Finance points out the doubtful nature of the receipts." 20. From this it is obvious that the funds were transferred to the assessee's father's account by T.T.transfer and again it was retransferred to assessee's account. Therefore, it is for the assessee to explain how the assessee's father got the funds. The assessing officer has taken pain in examining assessee's father. However, he could not give any satisfactory explanation except by saying that it was his savings and salary. In the absence of any material to show that the assessee's father has saved so much of money, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the claim of the assessee/her father that the transfer was from savings of her father cannot be accepted. To accept the gift, the assessee has to definitely establish the creditworthiness of her father. The contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee is that if the assessee could not explain the creditworthiness, the addition could be made only in the hands of the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls. Insofar as assessment year 2002-03 is concerned, the challenge was against the addition of Rs. 36,67,010/-. According to the assessee, the Assessing Officer has taken Rs. 15,04,891/- as unexplained bank deposit. It was pointed out that the total deposit was Rs. 19,54,243/- and that the Assessing Officer has failed to take cheque deposit to the extent of Rs. 4,48,828/-. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that "the ld. representative very fairly submitted that the assessee could not explain the source for making these deposits". Despite that, it is seen argued before the Tribunal that the income was from real estate business and, therefore, only the net amount should be taken and not the gross amount. 11. Insofar as the unexplained credits to the extent of Rs. 10,77,219/- is concerned, the evasive contention raised was that the unexplained credit "might have" been used for making deposit in the bank account and, therefore, it should not have been taken as income of the assessee. Similarly, with reference to the cash withdrawal from the bank to the extent of Rs. 2,91,600/-, the contention raised was that once the deposit was taken as income, withdrawal should not be taken as inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was with respect to addition on account of unexplained investment. The Tribunal has held that the said issue had already been contested in the appeal in relation to the assessment year 2002-03, where the Tribunal has ordered deletion of amounts withdrawn from the bank. Since facts were identical, similar view was taken with respect to these assessment years also and accordingly the Tribunal has ordered deletion of addition to the extent of amounts withdrawn from the bank. These issues were dealt with in paragraphs 30 and 31, which read as under: "30. The only issue involved in the remaining appeals in ITA Nos 46 to 51/Coch/2014 in the case of Shri O.G.Sunil is addition on account of unexplained investments. The issue is identical to the issues discussed in ITA No.45/Coch/2014 for the assessment year 2002-03. While dealing with the appeal for assessment year 2002-03 we have found that out of the total addition made on account of unexplained investments of Rs. 36,67,010 an amount of Rs. 2,91,600 has to be deleted as the same represents withdrawal from bank out of the deposits in the bank account and the addition of the withdrawal would amount to double addition. The facts and circu....