2014 (9) TMI 925 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained money - Deposit in bank accounts - Held that - The assessee in the paper book filed copy of notice issued by the Assessing Officer and replies submitted before the Assessing Officer in which the assessee has filed copy of bank statement of Punjab National Bank before the Assessing Officer to show that there were withdrawals made on different dates to make availability of cash to the assessee. The assessee has made withdrawals from Citi Bank and further withdrawals have been made from partnership firm M/s. Ocean Shipping Agency in which the assessee was a partner. The Assessing Officer has brought nothing on record to show that the amounts withdrawn by the assessee utilised by the assessee in any other manner than the one which was represented by the assessee, the onus lies on the Department to show that the explanation offered by the assessee should not be accepted. We rely upon the decision of the hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Shiv Charan Dass v. CIT 1980 (4) TMI 74 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court . Considering the material on record, it appears that the evidence furnished by the assessee have not been appreciated by the Assessing Officer. Therefore the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Assessing Officer. - Matter remanded back - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging addition of cash deposits as income from undisclosed sources for assessment year 2008-09.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 11,47,000 in the assessee's Citi Bank account for the assessment year 2008-09. The Assessing Officer treated these deposits as income from undisclosed sources due to the assessee's failure to explain their origin. The assessee's appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was dismissed as no one appeared on behalf of the assessee.

The assessee's counsel argued that the Assessing Officer was provided with copies of bank statements and sources of deposits, showing withdrawals from another bank account with Punjab National Bank and Citi Bank, as well as from a partnership firm in which the assessee was a partner. The counsel contended that despite the evidence submitted, it was not appreciated by the Assessing Officer. The counsel requested a remand to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration due to a dispute with the earlier counsel preventing representation before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

In the judgment, it was noted that the material provided by the assessee, including bank statements and withdrawals from various accounts, had not been properly considered by the Assessing Officer. The tribunal emphasized that the burden was on the Department to refute the explanation offered by the assessee. Referring to a previous decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the tribunal concluded that the evidence presented by the assessee warranted reconsideration at the level of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the tribunal set aside the previous orders and directed the matter to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer, with a mandate to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, indicating a successful challenge to the addition of cash deposits as income from undisclosed sources. The judgment was pronounced in open court on September 23, 2014, by the members of the tribunal.