2017 (3) TMI 384 - AT - Income Tax

Unexplained Money u/s.69A - whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the additions of ₹ 20,13,530/- made by the AO towards unexplained cash deposits? - Held that - As based on the AIR information, the AO found cash deposits to the tune of ₹ 20,13,530/- with Kotak Mahendra Bank for acquiring bonds/debentures in the Financial Year relevant to Assessment Year 2008-09. We find that the CIT(A) has examined the issue in perspective. The order of CIT(A) appears reasoned and plausible. In the absence of any rebuttal from the assessee, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition of unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Justification of interest charged under sections 234B/C/D of the Act.
3. Validity of penalty proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the addition of ?20,13,530 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO found cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee based on AIR information. The appellant failed to explain the source of these deposits, leading to the addition. The appellant's submissions highlighted reliance on an accountant who neglected notices, resulting in delayed action by the assessee. Despite the explanations provided, the CIT(A) upheld the addition, emphasizing the lack of supporting evidence for business transactions and failure to maintain proper accounts. The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s decision reasonable and dismissed the appeal, as no rebuttal was presented by the assessee.

2. The issue of charging interest under sections 234B/C/D of the Act was raised in the appeal. However, the details provided in the judgment did not delve into the specifics of this aspect, and no further analysis or decision was mentioned regarding this issue.

3. The initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act was also contested in the appeal. Similar to the interest issue, the judgment did not elaborate on the outcome or decision regarding this matter. The focus remained primarily on the addition of unexplained money under section 69A, which formed the crux of the appeal and subsequent dismissal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to add ?20,13,530 as unexplained money under section 69A due to the lack of evidence and proper accounts from the assessee. The appeal was dismissed ex-parte as the appellant did not participate in the proceedings, and the Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s reasoning valid in the absence of any rebuttal. The judgment did not provide detailed insights into the issues of interest charged under sections 234B/C/D or the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c), focusing primarily on the unexplained money addition and its confirmation.