9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 1116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case hence the same may kindly be quashed. 2. Rs. 12,87,100/-: The Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in sustaining the addition of Rs. 12,87,100/- out of the addition of Rs. 16,09,500/- made by the Id. AO u/s 69A as unexplained money on account of cash deposits in the bank account, during the demonetization period. The Ld. CIT(A) and AO have also erred in not considering the vital facts and material available on record in their true perspective and sense. Hence the addition so made by the Id AO is also being contrary to the real facts of the case and not according to the provision of law, hence the same may kindly be deleted in full. 3. The Id. AO has also grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case invoking the provisions of Sec. 115BBE for taxing the income at the higher rate, without issue any show cause notice and also not applicable in the present case. The Ld. AO has also erred in not considering the vital facts and material available on record in their true perspective and sense. Hence the provisions of Sec. 115BBE so invoked by the Id. AO and confirmed by the Id. CIT(A) are also being contrary to the real facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Rs. 2,20,000/- is considered as explained by the assessee. Sources of remaining cash deposits, which are stated to be his wife's savings since 2012-13, it is noticed that assessee's wife is also an income tax assessee and filing her return and in her own return she had reported cash deposits in different banks and she has not reported in her return about the cash deposited in her husband's bank account or her joint account with her husband. Therefore, to protect the interest of revenue Rs. 16,09,500/- being the difference between Rs. 18,29,500 and Rs. 2,20,000/- is treated as unexplained money u/s 69A being deposited in his bank account and accordingly the same is added to his total income. 4. Aggrieved from the order of the Assessing officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Apropos to the grounds of the appeal so raised by the assessee, the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below:- "I have perused the assessment order and the grounds of appeal and submissions filed by the Appellant I find from the assessment order that the appellant had deposited cash of Rs. 18,29,500/- during the demonetization period in 8 bank accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh the basis of the same is not explained by the AO. However considering the facts of the case, I find that the source of cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 5,42,400/- is found explained. Regarding the contention of the appellant that the provisions of section 69A are not applicable to him since he is not required to maintain the books of accounts, I find that as per provisions of Section 69A of the I.T. Act, if the assesse is found to be owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles and the same is not recorded in the books, if any, maintained by him for any source of income and assesse offers no explanation about the nature and source of the same or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion of the Assessing Officer satisfactory, the value of the same may be deemed to be the income of the assesse for the such financial year. For the sake of clarity, the relevant provisions of Section 69A are reproduced as under- "Where in any financial year the assessee is found to be the owner of any money. bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and such money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article is not recorded in the books of account, if any, maintain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) with details 36-61 7. On the other hand, Id. DR relied upon on the order of the lower authority. 8. We have heard the rival contention and perused the material placed on record. We observed that the assessee and his wife namely Smt. Kanak Lat Chajed both are Senior Citizen, Retired Govt. Employee and pensioner. The assessee has filed the cash flow statements of last five years available at page 16 of the CIT(A) order and at page 18 of the paper book alongwith cash flow statements. The assessee has also filed the day wise cash withdrawals and deposit which are available at Page 19 to 30 of paper book. The lower authorities have only doubted the cash flow statements but could not disproved with any contrary evidences about the withdrawal of cash and its source. The assessee has also filed a family settlement of her wife family vide PB31-32, where she got Rs. 3,61,000/- which is also available with the assessee and the lower authorities has discarded or disbelieved without examining and without bringing any adverse evidence. The assessee has also filed the affidavit of his wife namely Smt. Kanak Lata Chhajed before CIT(A), which is produced before us at page 16-17 of paper book. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assistant Commissioner was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the appellants, supported as it was, by the entries in the cash book and the affidavits put in by the appellants before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner." Considering the reconciliation and cash flow statement filed by the assessee along with family settlement deed and affidavit of assessee's wife, wherein she owned responded of having deposited of cash out of her owned source and saving., Therefore, without controverting the fact stated of affidavit by the wife of the assessee, the addition made by the lower authorities even for an amount of Rs. 12,87,100/-is also not sustainable in the hands of the assessee and therefore, the same is directed to be deleted. In terms of these observation ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is allowed. 8.2 In Ground No. 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are consequential in nature and therefore, the same is not required to be adjudicated. Ground No. 1 and 5 are general and there is no grievance raised by the assessee before us on these grounds and therefore, the same is also not required to be adjudicated. . In the result, the appeal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
