2024 (5) TMI 27 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 69A - cash deposited from alleged unexplained sources - Whether cash deposited is duly explained from the cash withdrawals made by assessee and her husband? - assessee did not explain the reasons for withdrawal of cash from his bank account cannot be the basis to hold that the source of deposit of cash was not explained by the assessee - HELD THAT - Appellant has shown cash deposited was out of cash in hand available which was withdrawn by the assessee and her late husband during the year 2019-20 to 2021-22 - reference is made to date wise withdrawal of money by the assessee and her husband. The date wise cash withdrawals from the bank by assessee and her husband was held to be not justifiable by holding that cash withdrawals must have been used for incurring personal expenses. The deposit of cash on multiple occasions and no evidence was furnished that the same cash was deposited in assessment year 2021-22. The assessee had not given any plausible explanation in respect of transactions. As evident that cash withdrawals by the assessee and her husband from assessment years 2018-19 to 2021-22 are not disputed by the AO and CIT(A). Once the cash withdrawals are in excess of the cash deposits then it is amply clear that the cash deposits in the bank account were out of the available sources of the assessee. The burden lies on the revenue to bring material on record to suggest that the money withdrawn by the assessee was utilized elsewhere for personal purposes or the money so withdrawn was not available with the assessee as per the mandate of CIT vs. Kulwant Rai 2007 (2) TMI 185 - DELHI HIGH COURT well settled principle of law the passing of impugned orders is not just fair and reasonable and deserved to be set aside. Appeal of assessee allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The appeal challenges the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directing the re-computation of capital gains in the hands of the appellant u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Issue 1: Assessment of Cash Deposits

The appellant filed a return of income tax, which was picked for scrutiny assessment. The assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed, adding cash deposits from alleged unexplained sources. The appellant explained that the cash deposited was from withdrawals made by the appellant and her late husband in previous assessment years. The Learned CIT (A) upheld the addition of cash deposits u/s 69A of the Act. The appellant contended that the cash withdrawals were not disputed by the Assessing Officer, and the burden lay on the revenue to prove otherwise. The appellant relied on legal precedents to support their case.

Issue 2: Burden of Proof and Explanation of Cash Deposits

The appellant argued that the cash withdrawals made by the appellant and her late husband were not in dispute, and the cash deposits were from available sources. The appellant emphasized that the mere lack of explanation for cash withdrawals does not invalidate the source of cash deposits. Legal authorities were cited to support this argument. The Department contended that the explanation provided was unacceptable, as ordinary individuals would not keep withdrawn cash and later deposit it. The authorities doubted the explanation and the source of cash deposits.

Judgment Summary:

The Tribunal found that the cash deposits were explained by the cash withdrawals made by the appellant and her late husband in previous assessment years. The burden of proof lay on the revenue to show that the money withdrawn was used for personal purposes or not available with the assessee. The Tribunal held that the explanation provided by the appellant was justifiable, and the authorities had not furnished evidence to contradict it. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, setting aside the Assessment Order and the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

This summary provides a detailed overview of the legal judgment, highlighting the issues involved and the key arguments presented by both parties in relation to the assessment of cash deposits and the burden of proof regarding the explanation of such deposits.