2021 (11) TMI 239 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash deposits - No source of cash deposits given during the year in the two bank accounts maintained by the assessee - whether any on-money received by the assessee in cash over and above the declared sale consideration? - HELD THAT - As per cash flow statements and find that the assessee has sufficiently explained the source of deposits in form of salary and other retirement benefits which have been duly declared and withdrawals towards household expenses which are partly funded by him and partly by his wife and therefore, availability of cash in hand at the beginning of the year has been sufficiently explained. In the result, we hereby direct the Assessing officer to delete the addition so made in the hands of the assessee towards unexplained cash deposits - Decided in favour of assessee.

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of additions and disallowances made under section 143(3)/147.
2. Legality of action taken under section 147 read with section 148.
3. Justification for the addition of ?13,50,000/- as unexplained cash deposits.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Additions and Disallowances made under Section 143(3)/147:
The assessee challenged the additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the assessment order dated 31.08.2016, arguing that the additions were made without proper jurisdiction and were therefore bad in law. The Tribunal noted that during the assessment proceedings, the AO noticed cash deposits of ?13,50,000/- in the assessee's bank accounts and added this amount as income from other sources. The assessee contended that these deposits were sourced from past savings and withdrawals from the same accounts in previous years. The AO rejected this explanation, stating that the assessee failed to establish the source of the deposits adequately. The Tribunal observed that the AO did not judiciously consider the cash book and cash flow statements submitted by the assessee, which showed the source of the deposits.

2. Legality of Action taken under Section 147 read with Section 148:
The assessee argued that the action taken under section 147 read with section 148 was void ab initio and without jurisdiction. However, this ground was not pressed by the assessee during the hearing, and thus, the Tribunal dismissed it as not pressed.

3. Justification for the Addition of ?13,50,000/- as Unexplained Cash Deposits:
The primary issue was the addition of ?13,50,000/- as unexplained cash deposits. The assessee provided a detailed explanation supported by cash books and cash flow statements for the years 2012-13 to 2014-15. The assessee claimed that the cash deposits were from past savings, withdrawals, and proceeds from the sale of a residential property. The Tribunal reviewed these documents and found that the assessee had sufficiently explained the source of the deposits. The Tribunal noted that the AO failed to rebut the evidence provided by the assessee and relied on mere suspicion. The Tribunal emphasized that the AO's findings were based on incorrect facts and a lack of judicious consideration of the evidence. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition of ?13,50,000/- made towards unexplained cash deposits.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the addition of ?13,50,000/- and dismissed the grounds related to the validity of the action under section 147 read with section 148 as not pressed. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of considering all relevant evidence judiciously and not making additions based on mere suspicion. The order was pronounced in the open court on 01/11/2021.

← Previous Next →