TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plained and hence the addition is not warranted. We are surprised to note that while Ld.CIT(A) accepts that the provisions of Section 68 cannot be invoked, he invokes Section 69 of the Act, which does not apply to the facts of the case. AO has not made out any case of unexplained investments made by assessee. These are simply deposits in the bank account which are generally considered as ‘cash credits’ and provisions of Section 68 are correctly invoked by AO. For the reasons best known to the CIT(A), he invokes Section 69 which does not apply to the facts of the case. Since assessee has given proper explanation, we are of the opinion that no addition is warranted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No. 2094/HYD/2017 - - - Dated:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3,00,000 6 29-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,00,000 7 28-02-2010 By cash deposit Deposit by self 1,78,800 2.1. Assessee was asked to explain the sources for the deposits by the AO and in response to the same, assessee explained that the sources were travel cheques and gift from father. In the absence of evidence with regard to travel cheques and sources from father and the lack of nexus between the said sources and the cash deposits in the bank account, AO added a sum of ₹ 17,71,964/- as unexplained credits u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act [Act]. 2.2. Aggrie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) directed the AO to submit a remand report on the written submissions filed by assessee. With regard to the deposits made on 25-11-2009 and 29-11-2009 in Indian Bank which are claimed to be gifts given by assessee's father, AO stated that letter dt. 16-03-2013 filed during the course of appeal proceedings constituted additional evidence and objected to the admission of additional evidence. AO also mentioned that the father of assessee, Shri M. Srinivasa Rao also did not file copy of the bank account from which this amount was given. He concluded that there is no direct nexus between the so called withdrawal of cash by the father and deposit by the son i.e., assessee as there is a long gap of 7 months between the withdrawal of cash and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd. As such, these are not additional evidences and hence, not admitted. The appellant in spite of giving several opportunities did not prove the sources for cash deposits made in the bank account no. 403309318 maintained in Indian Bank, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad. The so called gift of ₹ 4,93,000/- from father has also not been proved. The confirmation letter filed before the Assessing Officer is not conclusive and not dated. The genuineness of the transaction has not been proved by the appellant. Apart from this letter, no other details/explanation was filed before the Assessing Officer. As already mentioned, the evidence submitted during these proceedings is not admitted in the absence of any justification in terms of Rule 46A of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 009, 3,27,000 was deposited in 24.11.2009 balance amount 1,73,000 in 25.11.2009 plus 1,93,000 given by father deposited in bank as on 25.11.09 1 17 4 26.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Deposited out of savings i.e., salary earned in US 24 25 5 27.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Deposited out of saving i.e., salary earned in u/s. 24 25 6 29.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Cash given by father deposited in bank 1 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the evidence filed by assessee, they are simply disbelieved and CIT(A), after sending the evidence on remand, rejects them at a later stage which is also not according to the rules. Having admitted the evidence and sending it on remand to AO under Rule 46A, he cannot go back and refuse the same at a later stage. The procedure followed by CIT(A) is not according to the prescribed procedures and also against the principles of natural justice. 8. Coming to the merits of the addition, it is very clear that an amount of ₹ 5 Lakhs has been withdrawn from account of assessee s NRE A/c, to that extent amount should have been given credit by the authorities. An amount of ₹ 10,78,800/- was deposited out of the so called traveler che ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
