2015 (5) TMI 889 - AT - Income Tax

Unaccounted Opening cash - Held that - The entries made at cash book are not supported by the credit card statement and therefore the claim of the assessee that the cash withdrawals using credit card were repaid by cheque issued from the assessee s bank account and therefore cash withdrawn using credit card should be considered as being available to the assessee to explain the cash deposit of ₹ 16.15 lakhs in his bank account cannot be accepted. The request of the ld. counsel for the assessee for a remand to the AO can also not be accepted because the CIT(A) had rejected the claim of assessee for absence of credit card statement and even before the Tribunal, the assessee did not make any attempts to file the same as additional evidence. In these circumstances, we uphold the order of the CIT(Appeals) on this issue. - Decided against assesse. Reimbursement of foreign tour expense disallowed - Held that - the credit card statement evidences purchase of air tickets from Indian Airlines on 20.11.2008, 23.12.2008 and 26.4.2008. As to how these purchases of air ticket is linked with the visits of the assessee to Sri Lanka, China, Hongkong and Bangladesh is not clear. There is no evidence filed by the assessee to show that these expenses were reimbursed by the employer. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the claim made by the assessee was rightly rejected by the CIT(A). - Decided against assesse. Gift from mother of ₹ 1 lakh disallowed - Held that - As that there was no evidence to show how the assessee s mother came into possession of the RD maturity proceeds which stood in the name of Shri Sanjeevarayudu. The CIT(A) held that even if the maturity proceeds are accepted as belonging to the assessee s mother, it was improbable to believe that the RD maturity proceeds which were received on 30.3.2005 would have been retained by the assessee s mother and given as gift to the assessee in the F.Y. 2008-09. The CIT(A) was of the view that it was highly improbable that the assessee s mother would have retained cash with her for 3 years and given it as gift to the assessee. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order u/s. 144 of the Act; Explanation of sources of cash deposits; Opening cash balance; Drawings from credit cards; Loan on credit cards; Reimbursement of foreign tour expenses; Gift from mother.

Opening Cash Balance:
The assessee claimed an opening cash balance of &8377; 4,03,527, attributing it to salary savings and cash transactions. However, the CIT(A) rejected this claim, noting the lack of evidence beyond the balance sheet. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the absence of supporting documentation for the opening balance.

Drawings from Credit Cards and Loan on Credit Cards:
The assessee explained &8377; 3.5 lakhs sourced from credit card transactions through a cash book. Despite the provided cash book, the CIT(A) found the lack of credit card statements to verify the claimed repayments, leading to a rejection. The Tribunal upheld this decision due to insufficient evidence and the failure to produce the required credit card statements.

Reimbursement of Foreign Tour Expenses:
Regarding &8377; 2,53,000 claimed as reimbursement for foreign travel expenses, the CIT(A) dismissed the claim due to a lack of detailed expense breakdown. The assessee later submitted employer certification and trip details, but the Tribunal found the evidence insufficient, as the credit card statements did not conclusively link expenses to the trips. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s decision was upheld.

Gift from Mother:
The assessee received a &8377; 1 lakh gift from the mother, sourced from a post office deposit. The CIT(A) questioned the legitimacy of this gift, highlighting discrepancies in the documentation and the improbability of the mother retaining funds for years. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s assessment, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on various sources of cash deposits, including the opening cash balance, credit card transactions, foreign tour reimbursements, and the gift from the mother. The lack of substantial evidence and inconsistencies in documentation led to the rejection of the assessee's claims, emphasizing the importance of verifiable proof in income assessments.