TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g an appropriate order. We also find that the documents filed on record claimed to have been produced before the authorities below. Even DR could not controvert the documents filed by the assessee before us by bringing any positive material on record. Accordingly, we are not inclined to support the order of the authorities below on this count also. Considering the above scenario and the factual aspect of the matter, we are of the opinion that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) in this regard deserves to be deleted and accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the same. Ground No.2 of the assessee is allowed. Unexplained deposit in State Bank of India bank account - HELD THAT:- We find that no material was brought on record either by the Assessing Officer or by the CIT(A) after examining the details and documents filed by the assessee before lower authorities to show that the assessee did not have the amount available with it out of earlier withdrawals made front different banks for making the same as deposit in the bank account as claimed by the assessee. In absence of any such material being brought on record, we find that the lower authorities were not jus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents/explanations /source of deposit of the same. 4. That the learned CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the addition of ₹ 1,00,000 made by the learned Assessing Officer to the total income as unexplained deposit in Punjab National Bank (A/c No. 05530000400018385),without considering the details/documents/explanations /source of deposit of the same. 5. That the learned CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the addition of ₹ 7,00,000 made by the learned Assessing Officer to the total income as unexplained deposit in HDFC Bank (A/c No. 012219300078637), without considering the details/documents/explanations /source of deposit of the same. 6. That the learned CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the addition of ₹ 1,00,000 made by the learned Assessing Officer to the total income as unexplained investment in purchase of flat .without considering the details/documents/explanations submitted in this regard. 7. Any other grounds that will be urged at the time of hearing. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 05.09.2011 declaring total income at ₹ 2,22,230/- for the assessment year 2011-2012. The return of income of the assessee was proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h in the bank account of the assessee to execute the constructions works of the building and the assessee after withdrawing the same incurred the expenditure towards construction expenses. In this regard, ld. AR drew our attention to page No.26 of the paper book, which is the confirmation given by Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal towards deposit of ₹ 30 lakhs in the bank account of the assessee for construction of his three storey building in the above address. This document was also produced before the CIT(A), however, the CIT(A) without considering the same has confirmed the action of AO. It was also contended by the ld. AR of the assessee that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee has submitted that the impugned amount was received from Soumya Ranjan Samal for execution of his construction of building, which has been incorporated by the AO in his assessment order at paragraph 5.1, pages 8 to 13. However, both the authorities below have overlooked the above confirmation submitted by the assessee. It was also the contention of ld. AR that when the assessee has already submitted the confirmation of the depositor namely Soumya Ranjan Samal before both the authoritie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 1 lakh to the same account on 14.07.2010. Therefore, ld. AR submitted that the amount deposited by the assessee is the previous withdrawals available with the assessee, thus, the addition may kindly be deleted. 6.3 As regards, ground No.5 relating to addition of ₹ 7 lakhs as unexplained deposit in the HDFC bank account, ld. AR, at outset, drew our attention to the cash book filed at page No.42 of the paper book and submitted that the assessee on 15.06.2010 has withdrawn amount of ₹ 8 lakhs from Axis bank account, ₹ 25,000/- from Punjab National Bank account and ₹ 2,00,000/- from HDFC Bank account, out of which on 14.07.2010, the assessee deposited ₹ 3,00,000/- in the HDFC Bank account. Therefore, the assessee has surplus money available with him to deposit ₹ 3,00,000/- in the HDFC bank account of the assessee. Similarly, the assessee has withdrawn ₹ 2 lakhs on 02.08.2010 from the HDFC account and ₹ 1 lakh on 10.08.2010 from Axis bank account, out of which the assessee deposited ₹ 2,00,000/- on 09.10.2010 into the HDFC bank account. Further the ld. AR contended that the assessee has withdrawn amount of ₹ 3,20,000/- fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required documents to substantiate his claim, however, the CIT(A) has not accepted those documents as the documents filed by the assessee are not supported with an application for additional evidence. Ld. AR before us filed the paper book containing pages 1 to 75 and it is certified that the documents in this paper book are already available in the lower forum and no new materials filed in this paper book. The confirmations of Soumya Ranjan Samal and Susanta Nayak were filed before the CIT(A), which has been incorporated by the CIT(A) in para 5.4 of the order. The assessee has categorically stated that the assessee was looking after the construction of building of Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal and for this purpose, to execute the construction work, Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal has deposited money into the bank account of assessee. In this regard, Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal has confirmed that as he is busy in his business activities, therefore, the assessee, being one of his family members, is looking after the construction work of the building without any remuneration or commission or incentives. He further confirmed that all money are paid out of his individual tax-paid income. Further on co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , then, for the purposes of making any enquiry or investigation relating thereto, it shall be competent for him to exercise the powers conferred under sub-section (1) on the income-tax authorities referred to in that sub-section, notwithstanding that no proceedings with respect to such person or class of persons are pending before him or any other income-tax authority.] [(2) For the purpose of making an inquiry or investigation in respect of any person or class of persons in relation to an agreement referred to in section 90 or section 90A , it shall be competent for any income-tax authority not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, as may be notified by the Board in this behalf, to exercise the powers conferred under sub-section (1) on the income-tax authorities referred to in that sub-section, notwithstanding that no proceedings with respect to such person or class of persons are pending before it or any other income-tax authority.] (3) Subject to any rules made in this behalf, any authority referred to in sub-section (1) [or sub-section (1A)] [or sub-section (2)] may impound and retain in its custody for such period as it thinks fit any books of account o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der. We also find that the documents filed on record claimed to have been produced before the authorities below. Even the ld. DR could not controvert the documents filed by the assessee before us by bringing any positive material on record. Accordingly, we are not inclined to support the order of the authorities below on this count also. Considering the above scenario and the factual aspect of the matter, we are of the opinion that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) in this regard deserves to be deleted and accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the same. Ground No.2 of the assessee is allowed. 13. In ground No.3, the assessee agitated against upholding the addition of ₹ 13,00,000/- as unexplained deposit in State Bank of India bearing Account No.31264302987. Ld. AR during the course of hearing drew our attention to page 26 of the paper book which is copy of confirmation of Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal with regard to deposit of ₹ 7 lakhs (₹ 4 lakhs+₹ 3 lakhs) into the bank account of assessee towards construction expenses. Further, ld. AR of the assessee drew our attention to pages 40 41, which are the confirmations given by Shri Susan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. Further, we find that Id A.R. has filed paper book, wherein, at page 19 of the submission made before the CIT(A) in para 6, that ₹ 8,31,677/- deposited in the bank account was out of withdrawal from different banks. We find that no material was brought on record either by the Assessing Officer or by the CIT(A) after examining the details and documents filed by the assessee before lower authorities to show that the assessee did not have the amount of ₹ 8,31,677/-available with it out of earlier withdrawals made front different banks for making the same as deposit in the bank account as claimed by the assessee. In absence of any such material being brought on record, we find that the lower authorities were not justified in making the addition of ₹ 8,31,677/- in the hands of the assessee as unexplained deposit in bank account. Therefore, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and delete the addition of ₹ 8,31,677/- and allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. Respectfully following the above observations of the Tribunal and considering the factual aspect of the matter, we are of the considered view that the addition made by the AO and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,00,000/- on 09.10.2010 into the HDFC bank account. Further on perusal of the cash book filed by the assessee at page 43 of the paper book, we find the assessee has withdrawn amount of ₹ 3,20,000/- from Axis Bank account, ₹ 1,00,000/- from Punjab National Bank account and ₹ 2,00,000/-from HDFC Bank account on 10.11.2010. On comparison to the above amounts with the bank statement filed by the assessee, copies of which are placed in the paper book, we find that the above amounts were duly withdrawn from the above bank accounts and out of which ₹ 2 lakhs was deposited on 19.01.2011 to the HDFC bank account bearing No.01221930007863. On the above facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that to deposit ₹ 7 lakhs into the HDFC bank account, the assessee has sufficient amount which was his earlier withdrawals as discussed above and as per the above observations of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Y.2010-2011 in Pabitra Mohan Samal (supra) addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is not justified. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the same. Ground No.5 is allowed. 16. Lastly, coming to the ground No.6 with regard to addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
