TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1871X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ptable. Hence, he held that the source of deposit of ₹ 14 lakh out of ₹ 25,31,686/-, is explained and deleted the addition to the extent of ₹ 14 lakhs and sustained balance amount of ₹ 11,31,686/-. D.R. though supported the order of the Assessing Officer has brought no positive and credible material on record to controvert the findings of the CIT(A) who after appreciating all the facts of the case deleted the addition of ₹ 15 lakhs. In the circumstances, we find no good reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A), which is hereby confirmed and ground of revenue is dismissed. Addition under the head unexplained receipts in cash/cheque - CIT (A) has himself admitted that there is a mismatch of dates in the submission made by the so-called creditor of ₹ 9,45,000/- - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) also observed that the record shows that the assessee received an amount of ₹ 10 lakhs by RTGS on 9.3.2010 from Capt Mohapatra and 22.3.2010 and cash of ₹ 12 lakhs was deposited on 31.3.2010. The bank account also shows that an amount of ₹ 11 lakhs was returned to Capt. Mohapatra by RTGS. Therefore, he held that the explanation of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d cash deposit - HELD THAT:- D.R. could not controvert the submission of ld A.R. of the assessee that the deposit of ₹ 1 lakh in bank account was out of maturity proceeds of fixed deposit made by the assessee by withdrawal through yourself cheque from Axis Bank on 12.8.2010. Therefore, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and delete the addition of ₹ 1 lakhs and allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. - ITA No.335/CTK/2015, 302/CTK/2015 (Assessment Year : 2010-2011) - - - Dated:- 10-9-2017 - S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee by: Shri D. Parida, AR Revenue by: Shri D.K. Pradhan, DR ORDER Per N.S. Saini, AM The cross appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are directed against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar dated 22.4.2015 for the assessment year 2010-2011. First, we take up the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No.302/CTK/2015. 2. In Ground No.1 of the appeal, the grievance of the revenue is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting addition of ₹ 15,00,000/- under the head income from undisclosed sources when the assessee has never disclosed four such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 25,31,686/- was added by the Assessing Officer being credits including cash deposit of ₹ 21,01,000/- in HDFC Bank A/c. No. 01221930007863. The assessee submitted that amount of ₹ 5 lacs and ₹ 6 lacs by DDs/Cheques and further cash of ₹ 3 lacs as earnest money have been paid to M/s. Reeva (P) Ltd. for purchase of a house on behalf of Smt. Archana Samal, sister of the assessee. The assessee submitted that the source of said payments of ₹ 14 lacs was cash receipt of ₹ 19,05,000/-on various dates from Smt. Archana Samal, out of which ₹ 5,05,000/- have been returned by cheque/cash. The CIT(A) observed that he has gone through the bank account and other documents and found the submission of the assessee to be correct. The assessee has paid the amounts to M/s. Reeva (P) Ltd. for purchase of a flat at Sirdi in the name of Smt Archana Samal. This shows that the assessee s account has been used for transactions on behalf of his sister Smt Archana Samal and the payments made by the assessee for the property in the name of Smt Archana Samal are sourced from Smt. Samal. Smt. Samal is assessed to tax and return filed for the Assessment year 2010-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bank Account No. 910040001261099, deleted the same. 11. Further, the CIT(A) found that the Assessing Officer has made addition of ₹ 25,31,686/- being credits including cash deposit of ₹ 21,01,000/- in HDFC Bank A/c. No. 01221930007863. The CIT(A) observed that the amount of ₹ 5 lacs and ₹ 6 lacs by DDs/Cheques and further cash of ₹ 3 lacs as earnest money have been paid to M/s. Reeva (P) Ltd. for purchase of a house on behalf of Smt. Archana Samal, sister of the assessee. The assessee submitted that the source of ₹ 14 lacs was the cash receipt of ₹ 19,05,000/-on various dates from Smt. Archana Samal, out of which ₹ 5,05,000/- was returned by cheque/cash. The CIT(A) observed that he has gone through the bank account and other documents and found the submission of the assessee to be correct. He observed that the assessee has paid the amounts to M/s. Reeva (P) Ltd. for purchase of a flat at Sirdi in the name of Smt Archana Samal. This shows that the assessee s account was used for transactions on behalf of his sister Smt Archana Samal and the payments made by the assessee for the property in the name of Smt Archana Samal are sourced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Soumya Ranjan Samal has confirmed to have given an amount of ₹ 15,71,433/- including cash of ₹ 9,45,000/-. The CIT(A) observed that the assessee was supervising the construction work on behalf of Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal is undisputed. Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal has also given amounts of ₹ 1,26,433/- and ₹ 5 lacs by cheques. The CIT(A) further observed that Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal has confirmed to have paid the said amounts on oath and has capacity to pay. The circumstances show that the amounts were required to be paid to the assessee who was supervising the construction work of Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal. Therefore, the CIT(A) held that in such circumstances, the mismatch of date is not a fatal error and hence, deleted the addition of ₹ 9.45,000/- being part of total addition of ₹ 27,71,433/-. 16. The CIT(A) further observed that the Assessing Officer has added ₹ 5 lakhs credited to Axis Bank A/c No. 909018041840143 received by cheque from Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal. The Assessing Officer added an amount of ₹ 1,26,433/- credited to Punjab National Bank A/c. No.0553000400018385 received from Sri Soumya Ranjan Samal by cheque. The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loan to Sri Pabitra Mohan Samal and further an amount of ₹ 10,00,000/- to Sri Pabitra Mohan Samal on 09.03.2010 for giving advance from purchase of a piece of land at Bhubaneswar in my name and the same amount was transferred through RTGS from my Bank A/C No 006101007893 maintained at Bhubaneswar. Further I confirm that said total amount of ₹ 11,00,000/- has refunded by Sri Pabitra Mohan Samal to me by transfer of the amount through RTGS on 03.04,2010 because the proposed purchase of land in my name could not be materialized. Further, it is confirmed that Sri Pabitra Mohan Samal has neither taken any remuneration or charges in this regard from me nor has made any profit out of that amount paid by me, to the best of my knowledge and belief. 18. From this, the CIT(A) held that it appears that cash withdrawn after receipt of fund from Capt. Mohapatra have been re-deposited since the same was not used and returned to Capt. Mohapatra. The assessee's detailed submission in this regard has merit. Therefore, he held that out of cash deposit of ₹ 12 lacs, ₹ 11 lacs is explained, therefore, he deleted ₹ 11 lakhs and sustained addition of ₹ 1 lac. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount since the explanation was not acceptable to him. 23. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the addition on the ground that both the assessee and the creditor have confirmed the transaction. Shri Soumya Ranjan Samal is a high-net worth individual. The amounts were received through banking channel. The assessee was supervising the construction work on his behalf. Therefore, he held that the source of credits of ₹ 5 lakhs and ₹ 1,26,433/- should be deleted. Hence, he deleted ₹ 6,26,433/-. 24. The Assessing Officer made addition of ₹ 12 lakhs as unexplained cash deposit in Axis Bank A/c No. 909018041840143. The explanation of the assessee was that an amount of ₹ 11 lakhs was received from Cap Mohapatra by RTGC and ₹ 1 lac as cash which was the source of deposit of ₹ 12 lakhs. The Assessing Officer did not accept the same. 25. On appeal, the CIT(A) called for confirmation from Capt Mohapatra, who confirmed to have advance ₹ 1 lakh as cash and ₹ 10 lakhs by RTGC to the assessee. The CIT(A) also observed that the record shows that the assessee received an amount of ₹ 10 lakhs by RTGS on 9.3.2010 from Capt Mohapatra and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n behalf of Smt. Archana Samal and the balance amount of ₹ 5,05,000/- was returned by the assessee after withdrawing from HDFC Bank. Therefore, the source of deposit of ₹ 4,04,991/- being deposit made in HDFC Bank Account No. 00441000124939 was out of sum of ₹ 19,05,000/- received from Smt. Archana Samal. 33. Ld D.R. supported the orders of lower authorities. 34. We find that it is not in dispute that the assessee had claimed to have received ₹ 19,05,000/- in cash from Smt. Archana Samal, sister of the assessee. The assessee has claimed that this amount was deposited by the assessee in HDFC bank A/c. No.00441000124939out of which ₹ 14 lakhs was utilized for payment to M/s. Reeva Pvt Ltd., for purchase of house for Smt. Archana Samal. The assessee explained that ₹ 4,04,991/- was deposited out of ₹ 5,05,000/- received from Smt. Archana Samal which is part of ₹ 19,05,000/- received in cash from the assessee. Thus, it cannot be said that the assessee could not explain the source of ₹ 4,04,991/- being deposit made in HDFC Account No. 00441000124939. Ld D.R. could not controvert the above submission of ld A.R. of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to substantiate cash deposit together with relevant ledger account. Hence, it was the submission of ld A.R. that the addition should be deleted. 44. We find that ld D.R. has not controverted the above submission of ld A.R. of the assessee. Further, we find that ld 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 from 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/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lakhs from Capt. Mohapatra by RTGS and ₹ 1 lakhs in cash. Therefore, he confirmed the addition of ₹ 1 lakhs for want of evidence. 51. We find that ld D.R. could not controvert the submission of ld A.R. of the assessee that the deposit of ₹ 1 lakh in bank account was out of maturity proceeds of fixed deposit made by the assessee by withdrawal through yourself cheque from Axis Bank on 12.8.2010. Therefore, we set aside the orders of lower authorities and delete the addition of ₹ 1 lakhs and allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. 52. In Ground No.6 of appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) has made double addition by upholding cash deposit of ₹ 4,04,991/- in HDFC Bank and ₹ 1,00,000/- in Axis Bank simultaneously disallowing cash deposit of ₹ 8,31,677/- out of cash withdrawal from various banks. 53. In view of our findings in Ground No.4 of the appeal of the assessee, where we have deleted the addition of ₹ 8,31,677/- and in view of our findings in Ground No.2 of the appeal of the assessee where we have deleted the addition of ₹ 4,04,991/- and in view of our findings in Ground No.5 of the appeal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
