2022 (11) TMI 579 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 - AO has not accepted the explanation of the assessee that previous year agricultural income was deposited - CIT(A) confirmed the order of the AO on the ground that in the assessment year under consideration the assessee has not having any agricultural income - HELD THAT - We find that neither the Assessing Officer nor the ld. CIT(A) disputed the agricultural income of previous assessment year - We are of the opinion that out of agricultural income which was left with the assessee the amount of .4, 40, 000/- was deposited in the bank account on 16.06.2009. So the assessee has explained the source and the onus are charged by disclosing the source. Therefore we find that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained. Accordingly we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Confirmation of addition of Rs. 4,40,000 towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The appeal pertains to the confirmation of addition of Rs. 4,40,000 towards unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee, who is the Managing Director of a company, filed the return of income for the assessment year 2010-11 admitting income of Rs. 13,78,240. The case was reopened, and during assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer questioned the cash deposit of Rs. 4,40,000. The assessee explained that this amount was part of agricultural income retained in cash from the previous year and deposited in the bank. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept this explanation and made the addition under section 68 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) upheld this addition.

Upon appeal to the Tribunal, the assessee did not appear for the hearing. The Tribunal proceeded to hear the ld. DR and examined the records. It was noted that the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) did not dispute the agricultural income of Rs. 13,49,730 from the previous assessment year. The Tribunal found that the amount of Rs. 4,40,000 deposited in the bank was part of the agricultural income retained by the assessee. The Tribunal held that the assessee had explained the source of the deposit, and the onus was discharged by disclosing the source. Therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) was deemed unsustainable. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, pronouncing the order on 19th October 2022 in Chennai.