TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 3705/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 12-9-2016 - SH. N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Sh. Pramod Kapur, CA For The Respondent : Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr.DR ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 24.02.2015 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, New Delhi. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised as many as six grounds, however, the grievance of the assessee relates to the sustenance of addition of ₹ 16,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of credits in the saving bank accounts. 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 27.10.2010, declaring total income of ₹ 7,22,450/- vide e-filing. The said return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) on 24.05.2011. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee about the cash deposits of ₹ 8,00,000/- each on 09.02.2010 and 26.02.2010 in ICICI Bank accounts. In response the assessee submitted as under: As regards ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir own understanding and beliefs. The day to day cash account of the assessee has been furnished to you from which you can gauge that the assessee maintains the accounts to keep track of her financials otherwise. These transactions are duly reflected in that cash account. 3.3 However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the submissions of the assessee and made the additions of ₹ 16,00,000/- by observing in paras 3.3, 3.4, 3.10 and 3.11 of the assessment order dated 22.03.2013, which read as under: 3.3 From the above para, it is very much clear that amount of ₹ 15,00,000/- (Rs.9,00,000/- on 05.05.2009 and ₹ 6,00,000/- on 06.05.2009) was not touched at all and the same was deposited back in to the bank after some time. To verify the contention of the assessee details of cash withdrawals amounting to ₹ 15,00,000/- and deposits of ₹ 16,00,000/- were collected from the ICICI Bank Limited and is discussed here as under: Cash Withdrawals Denomination No. Rs.9,00,000/- on 05.05.2009 though cheque no. 000259 500 X1800 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally on 22.07.2010 vide e-filing acknowledgment no. 132951880220710 declaring total income of ₹ 722450/-. The assesse s sources of income during the year were income from salary, income from house property and income from other sources. The Assessee had withdrawn cash from her savings bank account during the year under Assessment on various dates. Out of the said withdrawals cash was deposited back in her savings bank account. The total cash deposited was ₹ 16.00.000/- which was adequately covered by the withdrawals made by the assessee during the year. The assesses had deposited cash in her saving bank account with ICICI Bank amounting to ₹ 16.00.000/- . The said cash was deposited out of cash withdrawals made from the saving s bank account by the assesses on earlier dates during the year itself. The daily cash book / account is maintained by the assessee which was submitted explaining the source of cash deposit to the Ld. Assessing officer. The Ld. Assessing officer has made an enquiry from the bank and collected the details of the cash with drawn by the assesses and the cash deposited by the assesses during the year with particulars of denomination of currency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02.2010, amounting to a total of ₹ 16,00,000/- in the F.Y. 09-10 relevant to A.Y. 10-11. On being required to explain the source of Cash deposited in the bank account, it was claimed that the deposit was out of Cash withdrawals made from the banks during the year itself. It was claimed that the Assessee had to make payment of ₹ 12,00,000/- to Sh. Bhupinder Aggarwal against purchase of property and that a cheque dated 04.05.09 was prepared to be given to him for Sale Deed to be executed on 06.05.09. It has been claimed that the Assessee withdrew Cash amounting to ₹ 9,00,000/- on 05.05.09 and ₹ 6,00,000/- on 06.05.09, to pay to him, in case Sh. Bhupinder Aggarwal demanded Cash. It has been further claimed that the cheque dated 04.05.09 for ₹ 12,00,000/- was encashed by that party on 09.05.09. 8.2 The Assessee has sought to claim that the amount was withdrawn to pay to Sh. Bhupinder Aggarwal in case he demanded Cash. There is no doubt that the Assessee had withdrawn this Cash, and also that the Assessee purchased a property from Sh. Bhupinder Aggarwal. A copy of the Purchase Deed of the property was examined as per which the Deed was presented on 06 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son why any prudent person would keep such a large amount of Cash, particularly when the Assessee did not keep large amounts of Cash with her, which is clear from the fact that the amounts of ₹ 9,00,000/- and ₹ 6,00,000/- were withdrawn when required, shows that the Assessee was not of the habit of retaining large amount of Cash. If there was any merit in the claim of the Assessee that ₹ 15,00,000/- were withdrawn from the bank to give to Sh. Bhupinder Aggarwal as a substitute of cheque of ₹ 12,00,000/-, then not only the amount would have matched with the balance amount payable, but also the amount would have been put back in the bank within a day or two. It is seen that the Assessee claims to have withdrawn the money just when it was needed, and once if it was not needed, that money would immediately have been deposited back in the bank. This was so, because no prudent person would withdraw huge amounts of Cash from the bank, where it was earning interest and was in safekeeping of the bank, and put it idle and at potential risk of theft, robbery, damage to the currency notes etc. If the money having been withdrawn on 05.05.09 and 06.05.09 for use on 06.05. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as per belief of the Assessee she cannot spend money drawn for a particular purpose for any other purpose. It is obvious that the Assessee is making a false claim that the withdrawn cash was kept for more than 9 months and re-deposited in the bank. It is obvious that the Cash available with the Assessee in May 2009 was spent for some other purposes, i.e. that as per option A B in Para 8.3 above, and that during the year, the Assessee earned unaccounted income of ₹ 16,00,000/- which was deposited in Cash in the bank in February 2010. Hence this unaccounted income of ₹ 16,00,000/- has to be brought to tax, which has rightly been taxed by the Learned Assessing Officer. 3.8 Aggrieved from the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee filed appeal before the ITAT. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee maintained the cash book in which cash withdrawn from the bank was entered and the same was re-deposited by making the entry in the cash book. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the learned Commissioner of I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t which was the withdrawal from her bank account. On a similar issue, a coordinate bench of ITAT, Delhi Benches, New Delhi, in the case of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sh. Ganga Singh, ITA No. 1416/Del/2013 for assessment year 2009-10, observed in para 16 of the order dated 22nd October, 2014, as under: 16. On an analysis of the record, we find that Ld.AO has overlapped the facts. He assumed that the assessee had transferred agricultural land and must have received ₹ 87 lakhs. He has made reference to the 10 denomination of notes etc. But the Ld. First Appellate Authority has observed that the Revenue is concerned with the source of deposit and not with regard to difference in the denomination of notes. It appears that Ld.AO has an expectation that same notes ought to be possessed by any individual which were withdrawn from the bank for redeposit. In other words the amount withdrawn should not be used for any other purpose and the same notes should be redeposited. To our mind such an expectation in the ordinary course of life is little improbable. Ld. First Appellate Authority had appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case and felt that the assessee has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
