2014 (12) TMI 837 - AT - Income Tax

Addition of unexplained investment in bank account u/s 69 -Whether the amount deposited in the bank account comprises mainly of loan received from business associates - Held that - Assessee rightly submitted that deposits amounting to ₹ 10,43,994/- in the account were made by assessee during the AY 2005-06 and therefore addition cannot be made during the year under appeal - therefore addition cannot be made during the year under appeal for unexplained investment thus, the addition made by CIT(A) is set aside Decided in favour of assessee. Addition of ₹ 50,000/- on unexplained expenditure Held that - Assessee rightly submitted that there were totaling/arithmetic error by AO while making the addition - relevant pages of paper book correctly shows that there was totaling error by AO while taking the purchases of the assessee amounting to ₹ 15,69,618/- as per the seized documents - the purchases as per books of accounts and as per seized documents were of ₹ 15,19,618/- only and therefore no addition was called for thus, the addition made by CIT(A) is set aside Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Unexplained investment in bank account
2. Unexplained expenditure due to totaling error

Analysis:

Issue 1: Unexplained investment in bank account
- The appeal was against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-II Ahmedabad dated 13-12-2010 concerning the addition of Rs. 10,43,994 made by the AO on account of unexplained investment in the bank account of the assessee.
- The AO observed during the assessment proceedings that the assessee was operating a bank account not reflected in the return of income. The source of deposits claimed to be from friends and relatives was not proven genuine by the assessee.
- The AO made the addition under section 69 of the IT Act, which was confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) upon appeal.
- The assessee argued that the deposits were made during the assessment year 2005-06, not the year under appeal, and therefore, the addition was not valid.
- After considering the submissions and evidence, the Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the deposits were made in the bank account during the assessment year 2005-06. The addition was deemed inappropriate for the year under appeal, and it was deleted. The AO was allowed to consider these deposits for the relevant assessment year.

Issue 2: Unexplained expenditure due to totaling error
- The second ground related to the addition of Rs. 50,000 on account of unexplained expenditure due to a totaling error made during the assessment.
- Loose papers seized during the search proceedings showed a discrepancy in purchases compared to the books of account, leading to the addition by the AO.
- The assessee contended that there was a totaling error by the AO, which was not accepted by Ld. CIT(A) due to lack of relevant details.
- However, during the appeal, the counsel demonstrated the totaling error by showing discrepancies in the purchases as per the seized documents and the books of accounts.
- The Tribunal found that no addition was warranted as the purchases were correctly accounted for in the books of accounts. Therefore, the addition was deleted based on the evidence presented during the appeal.
- Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and both grounds were decided in favor of the assessee.

This judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad addressed the issues of unexplained investment in a bank account and unexplained expenditure due to a totaling error. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the additions made by the AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in both instances. The detailed analysis provided insights into the facts, arguments, and conclusions reached by the Tribunal for each issue raised in the appeal.