TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sit in the hands of appellant, and had incorrectly and unjustifiably upheld the said action of ld.AO. 1.1 That the ld.CIT(A) erred on both facts and in law in confirming the action of the ld.AO of making an addition of ₹ 38,50,000 without appreciating that the addition is merely based on suspicion and subjective opinion of the ld.AO on the business of sale purchase of properties. 1.2 That the ld.CIT(A) erred on both facts and in law in confirming the action of the ld.AO of rejecting the explanation of the appellant of cash deposit in bank without appreciating that the said rejection is not supported by any cogent reason or any material on record which remotely suggest that there is any investment/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Barakhamba Road, Standard Chartered Bank, Chanakya Puri and Punjab National Bank, Chanakya Puri. The assessee filed explanation in his regard and gave the reconciliation thereof which is listed in page 2 of the assessment order. The claim of the assessee was that the various cash withdrawals were made which after short intervals ranging from few days to a month were deposited in the bank. Similarly, the assessee explained that for the purpose of its business of buying and selling of properties, cash was withdrawn from the bank account. Since the properties could not be purchased, they were redeposited in the bank account. The Assessing Officer further observed that in many property transactions, there was high probability of generation of u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eposits. On the basis of overwhelming circumstantial evidence, it would become obvious that majority of the cash deposits were out of sale-consideration of the properties sold by the assessee, as mentioned in Table-2 on page 3 of the assessment order. Further, as discussed in Para-8 9, the assessee had shown a particular suspicious pattern of behaviour while depositing the cash in various bank accounts. This also strongly supports the argument that the cash deposits of the assessee are from unaccounted sources. After analyzing the entire pattern of cash deposits and evaluated the circumstantial evidence, a reasonable and just addition of ₹ 38,50,000/- was made on account of unexplained cash deposits. 3. During the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessment order. In view of the facts submitted above, the addition may kindly be confirmed. The report of the AO is also enclosed herewith. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee contends that no comment has been offered by the Assessing Officer in respect of reconciliation of the assessee for making cash deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee withdrew cash from the bank accounts and since they could not be utilized after a period of few days or a week depending upon circumstances redeposited the cash in his own account. The deposits are not new but are redeposit of the cash withdrawn. There is no finding that the assessee has utilized the amount withdrawn by cash in any other activity or property. 6. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial on record. In our view, the addition made by the lower authorities is on the basis of assumptions and surmises. If it was found by the Assessing Officer that the assessee may have earned unaccounted income, then he should have made further enquiries from purchasers and give a positive finding about such income. In the absence thereof, the observation of the lower authorities that the case deposits are attributable to income generated by the assessee from such property transactions is unfounded. Coming to the assessee s reconciliation, in our view, the same has not been controverted on the basis of any material and has been ignored on surmises. There is no finding that the cash withdrawn by the assessee was invested elsewhere. In the abs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
