Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (2) TMI 39 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
- Addition of ?20,50,000 made by AO under section 69A of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12.

Analysis:
1. Facts of the Case:
- The assessee sold a residential property and deposited the sale proceeds in the bank account.
- The AO observed cash deposits in the bank account totaling ?30,60,000.
- Discrepancy arose regarding the source of ?20,50,000 deposited in cash on 08.07.2010.

2. Assessee's Explanation:
- Assessee claimed ?9,50,000 was received in advance and the balance was deposited on 08.07.2010.
- Assessee stated that a cheque of ?20,00,000 was received from the buyer and returned on the same day.

3. AO's Findings:
- AO found the explanation unsatisfactory and issued a show-cause notice.
- Purchaser confirmed cash and cheque payments, leading to discrepancies in explanations.

4. CIT(A) Decision:
- CIT(A) confirmed the addition of ?20,50,000 as unexplained cash deposit.
- The purchaser denied making the cash deposit, supporting the AO's conclusion.

5. ITAT Decision:
- ITAT considered the sale deed, bank transactions, and buyer's cheque issuance.
- Found it improbable that the sale consideration was fully received before the registry.
- Accepted that cash deposit was part of the sale consideration, supported by evidence.

6. Conclusion:
- ITAT allowed the appeal, considering the sale deed, cash deposit, and cheque issuance.
- Accepted the assessee's explanation that the cash deposit was part of the sale consideration.
- Decided in favor of the assessee, overturning the CIT(A)'s decision.

7. Final Verdict:
- ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeal against the addition of ?20,50,000.
- The judgment highlighted the importance of documentary evidence and the sequence of transactions in determining the source of funds.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates