2023 (3) TMI 615 - AT - Income Tax

Addition as unexplained money u/s. 69A - HELD THAT - Addition is reduced by the CIT(A) to the extent of ₹.2.50 lakhs by not agreeing with the submissions of the assessee that this money was from her mother. Before us, at the time of hearing assessee has filed an affidavit/confirmation that assessee s mother has given ₹.2.5 lakhs to her daughter. We observe that assessee has deposited excess money after the completion of her daughter marriage and the disputed amount is only ₹.2.5 lakhs which is less than the amount specified in Instruction NO. 3/2017 by CBDT in relation to cash deposits during demonetization period. The cash deposited by the assessee is within the limit prescribed under above said instructions of the CBDT. Therefore, the addition sustained by the CIT(A) is accordingly deleted and the appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for unexplained cash deposits during demonetization period, and the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18.

Facts of the case:
The assessee, a housewife, declared an income below the taxable limit in her return of income. She explained that cash deposits were made for her daughter's marriage, utilizing funds from fixed deposits and subsequent withdrawals. The Assessing Officer observed discrepancies in the cash transactions related to demonetization, leading to the addition of unexplained money under section 69A of the Act.

Decision of the Ld.CIT(A):
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal, confirming an addition of Rs. 2,50,000 out of the total unexplained cash deposits. The Ld.CIT(A) found inconsistencies in the appellant's submissions regarding the source of the deposits and concluded that the total deposits belonged to the appellant. The addition was upheld based on the facts presented.

Grounds raised in the appeal before the Tribunal:
The aggrieved assessee raised multiple grounds in the appeal before the Tribunal, challenging the Ld.CIT(A)'s decision to confirm the addition of Rs. 2,50,000 as unexplained money. The grounds included contentions on the source of the cash deposits, consistency in decision-making, and the application of tax rates on the disputed amount.

Tribunal's decision:
Upon hearing the arguments and reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal observed that the cash deposited by the assessee was within the limit specified by CBDT Instruction No. 3/2017 for cash deposits during demonetization. Considering the overall facts and submissions, the Tribunal concluded that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was not justified. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and deleted the addition of Rs. 2,50,000.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal's decision favored the assessee, ruling in her favor by deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's judgment was based on the assessment of the evidence presented and compliance with the relevant instructions issued by the CBDT regarding cash deposits during the demonetization period.

This summary provides a detailed overview of the issues, facts, decisions, and conclusions from the legal judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT MUMBAI.