9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssue raised in the present appeal relates to addition made u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash found deposited in the bank account of the assessee remaining unexplained. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: "1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in eyes of law and facts of the case by confirming additions of Rs. 9,45,000, Rs. 4,73,000, Rs. 4,65,000 & Rs, 34000 out of total addition of Rs. 60,34,000 made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained deposits in the saving bank account of the assessee. 2. That the Id CIT (A) erred in sustaining addition to the tune of Rs. 9,45,000 on the ground that sale deed was more than 8 months old even though neither sale deed was doubted nor utilization of money somewhere else was alleged. 3. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings and money taken on loan by him. Our attention was drawn to the detail produced before the ld. CIT(A) explaining the-source of Rs. 60 lac with the father of the assessee Shri Jaspal Singh as reproduced on pages 3 and 4 of the order as under: Source of receipt Document attached Amount Sale deed, dated 02/06/2010, for land measuring 47 Kanal 10 marla sold to S. Ranjit Singh S/o S. Surinder Singh S/o, S. Jagdev Singh Copy of Sale Deed Rs. 31,47,000 Sale Deed, dated 08/09/2009, for land measuring 1 6 Kanal sold to S. Surinder Singh S/o S. Jagdev Singh S/o S. Ram Singh Copy of Sale Deed Rs. 9,45,000 Sales Deed, dated 08/09/2009, for land measuring 16 Kanal sold to to S. Surinder Singh S/o S. Jagdev Singh S/o S. Ram Singh Copy of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tent of Rs. 14,18,000/-(9,45,000 + 4,73,000) and it was improbable for him to retain it for such a long period before gifting to his son. The ld. CIT(A) also did not accept the explanation of the assessee vis-a-vis the gift given by the father from his savings of Rs. 4,65,000/- and the assesses own savings deposited to the extent of Rs. 34,000/-. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that when his submissions and additional evidences had been forwarded to the AO he had given a clean chit to the assessee vide his Remand Report, dated 7.9.2017, stating that he had gone through the additional evidences and found the source of cash deposited by the assessee as true and correct. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that based on this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the F.Y. 2009-10, which does not have any relevance with the Assessment Year under appeal. It is not explainable as to, under which circumstances the appellants father kept this huge money at home, and why the same were not landedover by Sh. Jaspal Singh, to the appellant at that time only. Therefore, in my considered view, the appellant has not been able to satisfactorily explain, the direct linkage of these sale proceeds, by way of cash deposits, after passing of more than 8 months. As it is against the theory of probability, that how a person who sold his land for such an huge amount in 2009-10, handover this amount to his son after passing of 8-9 months i.e in the year 2010-11, if one want to give such a huge amount to one's son, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spal Singh, has sold his agricultural land, during the year, regarding which direct nexus could be seen, between sale proceeds and cash deposited by assessee, therefore the same is accepted. However regarding the assessee's claim w.r.t cash received out of sale proceeds of land, sold by his father, in last F.Y., i.e. 2009-2010, is not tenable. Apart from this the appellants claim of having received Rs. 4,65,000/- out of his father's past savings, is not tenable, as no details were given by the appellant along with any documentary evidence in this regard. Therefore, I am not inclined to accept assesse's explanation up to this extent. Therefore, it is treated that the appellant has satisfactorily explained the amount of cash depos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son, since there are various considerations which are involved in making a gift and it is up to the donor to decide when and to whom to make the gift. In the present case the period of retention of the amount for eight months, we find, is not unusually large so as to doubt the genuineness of the same Considering the fact that the source of the amount with the donor has not been doubted, nor has the Revenue pointed out or brought on record any fact showing the usage of the said amount by the donor prior to gifting, we do not see any reason to hold the said explanation improbable and we find the same acceptable. 9. As far the savings made from agricultural income, the ld. CIT(A) we find had rejected the explanation stating that no cash flow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
