2023 (10) TMI 1029 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 68 - cash deposits in the Appellant s bank account unexplained - onus to prove - assessee contented cash deposits were made out of gross sale proceeds from both aqua culture and agriculture and also the gross proceeds from the sale of land besides accumulated saving for the past several years - HELD THAT - The assessee explained before the AO that he received 1/4th share from sale of ancestral property and received Rs. 2,30,628/- which was deposited in his bank account and the balance cash in bank was the income received on sale of fish. Now, the onus is on the assessee to substantiate his claim with proper evidence. However, the assessee has not furnished any details of such accumulated savings deposited in his account either before the lower authorities or before us. Hence, in the absence of any evidence to establish his contention, no reason to interfere with the order passed by the CIT(A) and accordingly dismiss the grounds raised by the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
The appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi regarding the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14.

Issue 1 - Addition of Cash Deposits:
The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case based on cash deposits in the bank account. The AO considered a portion of the cash deposit as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee contended that the cash deposits were from sale proceeds of aqua culture, agriculture, and land sale. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, leading to the appeal before the Tribunal.

Issue 2 - Validity of Reassessment Proceedings:
The assessee raised concerns about the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO, alleging erroneous facts and lack of verification. The grounds included challenges to the application of section 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, suspicion-based additions, and the need for allowance towards gross agricultural income.

Tribunal's Decision:
The Tribunal noted the cash deposit in the bank account and the explanations provided by the assessee regarding the sources of the deposits. However, the Tribunal emphasized that the onus was on the assessee to substantiate the claims with proper evidence. As the assessee failed to provide any evidence of accumulated savings deposited in the account, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the order of the Ld.CIT(A). Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Ld.CIT(A) regarding the addition of cash deposits, emphasizing the lack of evidence to support the assessee's claims. The appeal of the assessee was ultimately dismissed by the Tribunal on 18th October, 2023.