2014 (12) TMI 1183 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credit - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that - The assessee has maintained regular cash book and all its account are audited. The Ld.CIT(A) has analyzed each and every deposits made by the assessee in the bank account from the withdrawals made by the assessee from the bank and the cash available in the cash book. The assessee has also shown sufficient cash in hand in the balance sheet of the earlier years and also the source of cash available with the assessee. Thus, the deposits made by the assessee has been properly explained by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) and without there being any contrary evidence or rebuttal by the department, we do not find any reason to deviate from such a the finding recorded by the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) is affirmed and ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Addition of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 16,60,000 made by the assessing officer.
2. Deletion of the said addition by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)].

Issue 1: Addition of Unexplained Cash Credit:
The assessing officer raised an issue regarding the addition of Rs. 16,60,000 as unexplained cash credit in the bank account of the assessee. The assessing officer accepted the explanation for one deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 but disallowed the remaining amount after analyzing the bank account details. The assessing officer did not find sufficient evidence to support the source of the cash deposits.

Detailed Analysis:
The assessing officer disallowed the cash deposits totaling Rs. 16,60,000 after examining the bank account details. The assessing officer did not find the explanations provided by the assessee satisfactory for these deposits. The assessing officer accepted only one deposit of Rs. 1,00,000 which was directly correlated with a cash withdrawal. However, for the remaining deposits, the assessing officer found them unexplained based on the bank account analysis.

Issue 2: Deletion of Addition by CIT(A):
The CIT(A) examined the cash summary and the cash book maintained by the assessee. The CIT(A) observed that all cash deposits were made from the cash book maintained by the assessee. The CIT(A) also noted that the audited balance sheet showed a cash in hand balance available with the assessee. The CIT(A) meticulously analyzed each cash deposit and its correlation with the cash available in the cash book.

Detailed Analysis:
The CIT(A) carefully reviewed the cash summary and the cash book presented by the assessee. The CIT(A) found that all cash deposits were supported by entries in the cash book. The CIT(A) cross-checked the cash deposits with the cash available in the cash book on respective dates. The CIT(A) highlighted that the assessing officer did not provide any independent inquiries or evidence to prove the unexplained nature of the cash deposits. The CIT(A) emphasized that the burden of proof shifted to the assessing officer once the assessee provided the cash summary and cash book. The CIT(A) concluded that the assessing officer failed to disprove the explanations provided by the assessee and deleted the addition of Rs. 16,60,000 as unexplained cash credits.

In conclusion, the CIT(A) upheld the assessee's position and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue, affirming the deletion of the addition of Rs. 16,60,000 as unexplained cash credits. The judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining proper records and providing explanations supported by evidence to substantiate cash transactions, shifting the burden of proof onto the assessing officer to disprove the explanations provided by the assessee.