2022 (10) TMI 753 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of opening cash in hand - deposits made in ICICI Bank a/c - As submitted that the assessee had made several withdrawals as well as cash deposits in the said bank account and the peak balance also includes the opening balance - HELD THAT - As the assessee is to declare the cash of business only and there is no requirement to declare personal cash balance in the hands of the assessee - assessee was having Rs. 3,74,500/- in cash out of his saving from his profession as a lawyer. As undisputed fact that the assessee in a young lawyer and we cannot lose sight of the fact that a practicing lawyer have income in cash also, therefore, considering the background of the assessee, it can be very well presume that since the assessee is in the profession of lawyer for the last so many years, therefore, he might be having his savings to the tune of Rs. 3.75 lacs. At the same time, it is also important to mention here that the A.O. had not made any independent inquiry to the specific stand taken by the assessee. Assessee has duly proved that he was having opening cash balance of Rs. 7.00 lacs and thus should have been given credit of Rs. 7.00 lacs to explain the cash peak deposit balance of Rs. 15.25 lacs. Thus, we delete the addition of Rs. 3.75 lacs confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of opening cash in hand of the assessee. Thus, the A.O. is directed accordingly. Unexplained cash deposit - As assessee had duly discharged his onus of proving the deposit of Rs. 12.50 lacs in the bank account as he has categorically submitted that the assessee had received the said amount from Shri Gaurav Singh S/o Shri Vijaypal Singh Tanwar Banethi towards sale of his plot to the said purchaser and the A.O. had not even enquired or carried out any enquiry with regard to factum of said categorical stand taken by the assessee by calling or recording the statement of Shri Gaurav Singh S/o Shri Vijaypal Singh Tanwar Banethi. Thus, stand taken by the assessee went unrebutted as the A.O. who is investigator has failed to carry out any investigation to disprove the categorical stand taken by the assessee supported by documents. Thus, said amount of Rs. 12.50 lacs deposited by the assessee in the bank account cannot be termed as unexplained rather the assessee has duly proved the source of the said amount by giving complete address of the buyer i.e. Shri Gaurav Singh S/o Shri Vijaypal Singh Tanwar Banethi to the A.O. Thus, the source of said amount was duly explained and in view of the above facts and circumstances we direct to delete the same. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging addition of Rs. 3,75,000 on account of opening cash in hand and Rs. 12,50,000 on account of unexplained cash deposit.

Analysis:
1. Addition of Rs. 3,75,000 on account of opening cash in hand:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 3,75,000 on account of opening cash in hand, arguing that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not consider the track record of the assessee and rejected explanations without independent inquiry. The assessee demonstrated a detailed account of cash withdrawals and deposits, emphasizing an opening cash balance of Rs. 7,00,000 and a sum of Rs. 12,50,000 received from a property sale. The Tribunal noted that the AO failed to conduct an independent inquiry and accepted the assessee's explanations, deleting the addition of Rs. 3,75,000.

2. Addition of Rs. 12,50,000 on account of unexplained cash deposit:
Regarding the addition of Rs. 12,50,000 on account of unexplained cash deposit, the assessee provided evidence of receiving the amount from a specific individual for a property sale. Despite the lower authorities rejecting the contention due to lack of proof of return of the amount post-deal cancellation, the Tribunal found that the assessee had discharged the onus of proving the deposit. The Tribunal emphasized the failure of the AO to investigate or disprove the assessee's stand, leading to the deletion of the Rs. 12,50,000 addition. The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the amount, considering the provided evidence and the failure of the investigating authority to conduct a proper inquiry.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting both additions of Rs. 3,75,000 and Rs. 12,50,000. The Tribunal's decision was based on the assessee's substantiated explanations and the lack of independent inquiry by the Assessing Officer. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper investigation and consideration of evidence in such tax assessment cases, ensuring fair treatment for the taxpayers.