9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 2065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee & ITA No. 155/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA No. 250/16-17 dated 16.10.2017, in the case of Shri Subramanian Kulanthyaian, for the AY 2014-15. 2. ITA No. 36/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee & ITA Nos. 165 & 166/Chny/2018 are the appeals filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA No. 239/16-17 & in ITA No. 240/16-17 dated 16.10.2017, in the case of Shri A. Rameshkumar, for the AYs 2011-12 & 2014-15 respectively. 3. ITA No. 40/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order of the Comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA No. 249/16-17 dated 16.10.2017, in the case of Smt. Kulandian Sathyakala, for the AY 2014-15. 9. ITA No. 156/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA No. 237/16-17 dated 16.10.2017, in the case of Shri A. Anbu Kannan, for the AY 2011-12. 10. ITA No. 159/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA No. 244/16-17 dated 16.10.2017, in the case of Smt. Marimuthu Vijayarani, for the AY 2011-12. 11. Shri Sridhar Dora, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as income of the assessees and had held that the only peak credits were liable to be assessed. It was a submission that the order of the Ld.CIT (A) was liable to be reversed. 13. In reply, Ld.AR submitted that the addition as made by the AO by treating the entire cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessees as undisclosed income of the assessees, was erroneous. It was also a submission that the Ld.CIT (A) ought to have considered the explanation of the assessees and ought not to have confirmed the addition in respect of the peak credits in the bank accounts of the assessees. The alternate prayer of the assessees were that the issues in these appeal were squarely covered by the decision of the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar Branch. Though ld. Assessing Officer had listed out the major transactions at paragraph 4 of the assessment order, a date wise analysis of the bank accounts were not done. Assessee can always say that cash deposits in the bank account had come out of an earlier cash withdrawal as long as the time interval between the withdrawals and deposits are not so significantly substantial to disbelieve the source. Whether the assessee was carrying on any money lending business, has no relevance when an assessment is made considering the amounts deposited in the bank accounts. However, in our opinion cash deposits alone cannot be the subject of an addition ignoring the cash withdrawals. Hence, finding of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gross amounts for taxation when there have been both deposits and withdrawals in the bank accounts at regular intervals. The Ld.CIT (A) also considered the fact that peak credits in such situation renders the best method of addition. Though in the calculation of the peak credit, the Ld.CIT (A) has given the benefit of set off of the opening cash balance and opening advance, when peak credit is being considered, and when the business is the same as carried on in the earlier years, it is the peak credit of the earlier year that is liable to be considered as available for explaining the peak credit of the current year. However, we are not directing this method to be applied as the assessees have not raised any ground for this claim, and also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
