2014 (4) TMI 708 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on account of unexplained income Cash found during the search Held that - The assessee has withdrawn a sum of Rs.7.00 lakhs on 17.08.2009 from the bank account maintained in his name with M/s Vijaya Bank - The search took place on 20-08-2009 and the revenue found cash balance of Rs.6,31,100/- at his residence - the cash found at the time of search was lesser than the amount withdrawn from the bank two days prior to the date of search - CIT(A) that the first appellate authority is only talking about the possibility of the amount being spent away on the reasoning that the assessee is in building development business and hence he would not keep the money idle. The time gap between the cash withdrawal and the date of search was only two full days, thus, it may not be correct to reject the explanations furnished by the assessee without bringing any material on record to contradict the same - the explanation of the assessee about the sources of the cash found during the course of search have to be examined on the basis of evidences and explanations furnished by the assessee - There is no material to show that the money so withdrawn was spent away or utilized for any other purpose - assessee has explained the sources of the cash found at his residence at the time of search thus, no addition is warranted and the order of the CIT(A) set aside Decided in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the assessment of Rs.6,31,100/- as unexplained income in the hands of the assessee based on cash found during a search operation.

Analysis:
The appeal pertained to the assessment year 2010-2011 where the only issue was the confirmation of the assessment of Rs.6,31,100/- as unexplained income. During a search operation, cash amounting to Rs.6,31,100/- was found at the assessee's residence. The assessee claimed that this cash was withdrawn from the bank a few days prior to the search. However, the Assessing Officer (A.O.) did not accept this explanation citing lack of nexus between the cash withdrawn and the cash found. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition, emphasizing that the cash withdrawal was not accounted for and was likely spent on other purposes, considering the nature of the assessee's business activities.

In the appeal before the ITAT Hyderabad, the assessee argued that the addition was made on presumptions and surmises. The assessee provided evidence of the cash withdrawal from the bank shortly before the search and explained the source of the cash found. The ITAT noted that the cash found was less than the amount withdrawn from the bank, and there was no evidence to suggest the funds were used for other purposes. The ITAT disagreed with the Ld. CIT(A)'s presumption that the cash was spent elsewhere due to the nature of the assessee's business, as it lacked supporting material. The ITAT also observed that the time gap between the cash withdrawal and the search was minimal, making it unreasonable to reject the assessee's explanation without contradicting evidence.

The ITAT highlighted that the assessee's initial statement during the search operation about the cash balance at his residence being less than one lakh was not conclusive evidence. The ITAT stressed that the assessee's explanation should be evaluated based on the evidence provided. As the assessee demonstrated that the cash found was sourced from the recent bank withdrawal and there was no proof of alternative utilization, the ITAT concluded that no addition was warranted. Consequently, the ITAT allowed the appeal, directing the assessing officer to delete the contested addition of Rs.6,31,100/-.

In conclusion, the ITAT Hyderabad set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, emphasizing the importance of evaluating explanations based on evidence and rejecting presumptive additions without supporting material. The ITAT's decision focused on the nexus between the cash withdrawn and the cash found, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee and overturning the assessment of unexplained income.