TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has filed all the necessary evidences before the authorities below. However, no further investigation was carried out - once identity of the person giving the money is established and other evidences are placed before the AO pointing that entry is not fictitious then initial burden lying on the assessee can be said to be fully discharged. Under these circumstances, we are not in agreement with the conclusion drawn by the Ld. CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.5371/M/2018 - - - Dated:- 2-9-2021 - Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Ritu Kamal Kishor, A.R. For the Revenue : Shri T. Khalsa, D.R. ORDER PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 04.07.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. a) The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in passing an order without giving an opportunity to explain the case. The same be considered and addition be deleted. b) The Ld. CIT (A) err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atement of account of the assessee No.23110423830. The AO on the basis of the said account came to a conclusion that on 16.05.2012 assessee has deposited a sum of ₹ 4,39,07,574/- in his account. On 31.03.2016 the authorized representative of the assessee furnished a letter submitting therein that ₹ 4,39,07,574/- was received from Estate of Mr. Maqbool Fida Husain. However, no supporting evidences were filed. The AO also noted that on 23.03.2016 the authorized representative filed a certificate from Mr. Mustafa Husain from Dubai about the remittance of ₹ 4,39,07,574/- being given to Mr. Shafat Makul Husain out of father estate. Accordingly to the AO the source of money was not explained. Finally, the AO treated the said amount as unexplained cash for the reasons that the necessary ingredients of creditworthiness of the donor and genuineness of the transactions were not proved and resultantly added the same to the income of the assessee. 6. In the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition by observing and holding the impugned addition is covered under section 69A of the Act. The assessee furnished before the ld. CIT(A) copy of last Will and Testame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ofile of late Shri MF Husain a copy of which is enclosed at page No.13 to 19 of the paper book. The Ld. A.R. submitted that his paintings were sold at huge price which were shared among the six children. The Ld. A.R. also referred to the will left by the late Shri MF Husain the veracity of which is not doubted by Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. finally submitted that the assessee has furnished all the necessary documents before the authorities below which have not been disbelieved and therefore the finding of the authorities below are wrong and against the facts of the case as the assessee has proved credit by way of furnishing bill, letter of confirmation from the brother of the assessee and the fact of having remitted the amount through banking channel. The Ld. A.R. submitted that it is not the case of the Revenue that cash has been deposited in the assessee s bank account. The money has been received by way of foreign remittance in the bank account with proper inward foreign remittance. Thus the Ld. A.R. submitted that assessee has discharged onus cast upon it and the authorities below have failed to make any further investigation/inquiry to controvert the facts brought on record by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iness of a person who remitted the money into the assessee s bank account. The Ld. D.R., while strongly controverting various arguments put forward by the assessee s AR, submitted that the assessee has grossly failed to prove the source of these funds and therefore justified confirmation of addition by Ld. CIT(A). On the issue of addition being confirmed under section 69A of the Act by Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. D.R. submitted that same was not reflected in the books of accounts but only credited in the bank account of the assessee, therefore to plead that provisions of section 69A are not applicable is wrong and fallacious. 9. After hearing the rival submissions of both the parties and perusing the material on record, we find that in the assessee s bank account a sum of ₹ 4,39,07,574/- were credited on 16.05.2012 which according to the assessee was received by way of share of inheritance from the estate of his father late Shri MF Husain and was remitted from Dubai where late Shri MF Husain had settled in the later part of his life. The assessee filed letter of confirmation dated 10.03.2016 from Mr. Mustafa Husain, Dubai who is one of the three sons of late Shri M.F. Husain certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
