TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansaction. In case the AO was not satisfied with the evidence produced by the assessee, the AO was very well empowered to summon the donors for their examination. Though there may be an issue of creditworthiness of the donors for giving the gifts for the earlier year as well as for the year under consideration, however, the issue of gifts given in the earlier year cannot be examined for the year under consideration as it was part of the cash introduced by the assessee in the earlier year. Further, there is no dispute that the reason and occasion of the deposit made in the bank account is to purchase a house which was purchased by the assessee. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the addition made by the AO is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Unexplained expenditure for registration of plot of land - Held that:- This issue is consequential as the assessee has explained the source of this expenditure by opening cash balance as well as the gift of ₹ 2,50,000/-. Since we have decided the issue of availability of opening cash balance as well as genuineness of the gift in favour of the assessee, the said addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2,00,000/- 10.05.2010 1,00,000/- 11.05.2010 75,000/- TOTAL 5,30,000/- The AO asked the assessee to explain the source of cash deposit in the bank accounts. In response, the assessee produced the cash book showing opening cash balance of ₹ 11,32,626/- and gifts received during the year of ₹ 2,50,000/-. The AO did not accept the explanation of the assessee and after allowing the benefit of cash withdrawal from the bank account of ₹ 1,50,000/-, the AO made the addition of ₹ 13,82,626/- to the total income of the assessee as unexplained cash deposit in the bank accounts of the assessee. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A) and contended that when the assessee has shown the source of the cash deposit in the bank account as opening balance as well as gifts received from the family members, then the addition made by the AO is not justified. The assessee has explained that the assessee deposited the cash in bank account for the purpose of purchasing a house property which was purchased by utilizing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All these documents were filed before the AO, however, the ld. CIT (A) has misunderstood the fact and referred that the gift deeds were not filed before the AO while rejecting the claim of the assessee. He has also referred to the reply filed by the assessee before the AO as well as ld. CIT (A) and submitted that the assessee has discharged her onus by producing the supporting evidence of source of the cash deposit in the bank account. Since the assessee had to purchase the house property, therefore, the assessee has deposited this amount in the bank account during the year under consideration. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Smt. Manju Devi Nawal vs. ACIT, 34 Tax World 253 (JP) as well as the decision of Jodhpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Smt. Vimla Devi, 34 Tax World 151 (JD). Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that without pointing out any defect or mistake in the books of accounts as well as the evidence filed by the assessee, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable and the same may be deleted. 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the AO as well as the ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... books of account. The AO during the assessment proceedings was very well aware of the fact that ₹ 11,32,626/- was stated to have been introduced in the books during the earlier assessment year and, therefore, if the said claim of the assessee was not acceptable then the proper course of action was to make the addition of this cash introduced in the books of account under section 68 in the relevant assessment year in which the said cash was introduced in the books and not in the year under consideration when it is shown as opening cash balance. The AO instead of taking up the assessment of the preceding year has made the addition of the said amount by rejecting the source of the amount as shown as opening cash balance. Further, the AO has not rejected the books of accounts of the assessee and, therefore, once the assessee has established the availability of the cash in the books of account, then the proper course of action for rejecting the said claim and making the addition is to reopen the assessment of the earlier year. Hence, to the extent of availability of cash of ₹ 11,32,626/- being opening cash balance which was duly reflected in the books of account of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
