2013 (1) TMI 718 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credits - lack of evidence - Assessee contends that bank account belong to other person - Held that - Assessees have not produced any piece of evidence before any of the lower authorities to show that the savings bank deposits made by them related to other parties. They did not produce any evidence even before this Tribunal. The only prayer of learned counsel for the assessees was that if the cases are remitted back to the Assessing Officer, the assessees can produce evidence and present their cases more effectively. But, even for remanding the cases back to the Assessing Officer, it is incumbent upon the assessees to show the existence of acceptable evidence in their hands. They have not shown anything to lead this Tribunal to come to the conclusion that the assessees are already having dependable evidence to prove their contentions placed before the lower authorities in the earlier proceedings. - All these aspects have been fully explained by the assessing authorities as well as by the Commissioners of Income-tax (Appeals). We do not find any reason to interfere in the orders passed by those authorities. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of unexplained cash deposits in savings bank accounts under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The judgment involves two appeals filed by civil engineers and business associates against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in Chennai regarding unexplained cash deposits in their savings bank accounts for the assessment year 2009-10 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessees explained that the deposits did not represent their income but were made at the insistence of their bankers to project a better working result of the bank. They claimed the amounts belonged to various people who had entrusted money for civil works, and they acted as trustees. The assessees offered 5% of the deposits towards income liable for taxation. The Joint Commissioner of Income-tax directed the Assessing Officer to provide an opportunity to substantiate their explanations with evidence. However, the Assessing Officer found no evidence supporting the assessees' contentions and made additions to their income for the deposits made. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld these additions, leading to the second appeals before the Tribunal.

Upon detailed examination, the Tribunal concluded that the assessees failed to produce any evidence before the lower authorities or the Tribunal to prove that the deposits were related to other parties. The assessees' explanations lacked conviction, with no concrete evidence provided to support their claims. The Tribunal found the assessees' explanations akin to a wild goose chase without a centerpoint of conviction. The assessees' failure to provide basic details or evidence regarding the substantial amounts received from others led the Tribunal to confirm the additions made by the assessing authorities. The Tribunal did not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the lower authorities, rejecting the arguments made by the assessees during the hearing and confirming the additions made on just and proper grounds.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals filed by the assessees, upholding the additions made by the assessing authorities regarding the unexplained cash deposits in their savings bank accounts. The judgment was pronounced on January 30, 2013, in Chennai.