TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 289X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitial cash deposit is also not unexplained. Therefore, the addition of said amount is also confirmed. In view of this, the addition of ₹ 4,13,747/-(4,00,000 + 2,13,747) is confirmed and the balance is deleted. This addition is being confirmed on technical ground as there is a dispute between the assessee and Kalpesh P. Prajapati that the bank account was opened by Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati and not by the assessee. Further, since the Kalpesh Prajapati has agreed to pay the Income Tax liability before the Hon ble High Court, therefore as per our considered opinion that the assessee will recover the income tax liability of this income from Shri Kalpesh Prajapati and pay to the Income Tax Department. In view of this fact, the ground o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t this said controversial bank account was opened on 10-02-2007 and also furnished bank account of opening form, which clearly depicts the photograph of the assessee and his signature. Further, the copy of PAN card of the assessee is furnished by the bank which was submitted by the assessee as the supporting document to open the bank account in ICICI bank. In respect of summons u/s.131, the statement was recorded for the assessee wherein he denied to have opened the bank account as the claim that his identity was misused by Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati. He also stated that he has filed the complaint against Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati for misusing his identity. The assessee has filed one more reply dated 27-03-2016 via e-mail, stating that he ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n was confirmed. 5. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed this appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. counsel submitted that mutual agreement arrived in the assessee and Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati dated 04-01-2016 has not been honored by him, therefore the cash deposits in the said account does not pertain to the assessee. The ld. counsel has also filed a copy of High Court order in Criminal Misc. Application No. 6244 of 2018 dated 19-06-2018 by which Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati was granted bail on the condition that he has undertake before Trial Court and filed within three weeks from the date of his relates to the fact that he will deposit 50% of his total amount by the Income Tax Department in the account of the complaint (i.e., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e influenced to the findings in the complaint filed by the assessee against Shri Kalpesh P. Prajapati. We find that the AO has made addition of total cash deposits, however in such cases of cash deposits, only peak balance is being considered. The perusal of statement shows that there is a peak credit balance of ₹ 2,13,747/- as on 24-07-2007. Accordingly, addition to this peak balance is confirmed. Further, we find that there is opening cash deposit of ₹ 2,13,747/- on 04-04-2007, hence the initial cash deposit is also not unexplained. Therefore, the addition of said amount is also confirmed. In view of this, the addition of ₹ 4,13,747/-(4,00,000 + 2,13,747) is confirmed and the balance is deleted. This addition is being co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
