9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him u/s 147/143(3) of the Income tax Act 2. That the Assessing Officer and also CIT(A) erred in not correctly appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case and also the evidence in regard to the matter and wrongly making / upholding addition of Rs. 56,20,900/- being the cash deposits in the Bank accounts made during the year. 3. That the Assessing Officer / CIT(A) failed to appreciate that addition for above mentioned amount of Rs. 56,20,900/- could not be made in the case of the appellant and in A.Y. 2010-11 since the appellant had duly explained the fact that Bank accounts were in the joint names and the source of depositing the cash was earlier withdrawals from the same Bank accounts. 4. That the order passed by CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as a joint holder of bank account which was opened by the Assessee and her family members i.e. mother and brother. Further submitted that, the deposits were made by the shareholders of the account out of cash withdrawn earlier from the same bank account. The Assessee has also filed cash flow statement before the A.O. The A.O. made the addition by negating the claim of the Assessee on the ground that there was a huge gap between date of withdrawal and date of deposits i.e. cash was withdrawn in February, 2008 and deposited in September, 2008 and March 2010. The Ld. A.O. made the addition of entire cash deposits of Rs. 56,20,900/- as unaccounted income of the Assessee in the assessment order. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 05/10/2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account was related to sale of agriculture land with her brother in the year 2008 and the amount received were re-deposited in the said joint account and the said account was mainly operated by her brother Sh. Rohit Yadav being a primary holder. Further, all the transactions with a deposit or withdrawal remained in his hand. The A.O. added the deposits made in the three saving account which have been operated by her brother and husband showing cash deposit worth Rs. 56,20,900/- in the hands of the Assessee. It was claim of the Assessee that the said transaction reflected in the joint account was related to sale of agriculture land situated at village Lohari Tehsil Jhajjar which was sold with her brother and mother in the year 2008 and furth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt made and received in cash. Considering the fact that as per the cash flow statement there was sufficient cash in hand with the Assessee to re-deposit in her bank account and also finding merit in the claim of the Assessee regarding the unsuccessful land deal and returning of money and re-depositing in the bank account, we are of the opinion that the Ld. A.O. and the Ld. CIT(A) have committed error in making/confirming the impugned addition. Accordingly, finding merit in the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed and the impugned addition is hereby deleted.
9. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09th May, 2025 X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
