9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income Tax(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in making an addition of Rs. 17,63,318/- representing deposits in Bank accounts, to the income of the appellant. 3. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B amounting to Rs. 34,245/- and Rs. 1,82,642/- respectively." 3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee appellant is a property dealer deriving income from purchase and sale of property. The assessee declared an income of Rs. 99,000 under the caption "estimated net commission from property dealing" without mentioning any other details as was required in ITR-4. During the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut an eyewash wherein entries were only narrated and cash deposited and cash withdrawn. The Assessing Officer also observed that credit for Rs. 6 lakh on account of sale of two plots by the assessee and loan of Rs. 2,92,372 from HDFC Bank for purchase of Honda City Car was given. Hence, out of total credit entries of Rs. 26,55,690 for both the banks, the Assessing Officer accepted the explanation of the assessee pertaining to Rs. 2,92,372 and the balance amount of Rs. 17,63,318 was brought to tax as unexplained deposits in the bank account. 5. Being aggrieved by the above action of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) which was also dismissed with following observations and findings:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vance when compared to the sale consideration, exceptionally long period for registry of more than two years etc. are material and relevant. Further, it is not understandable as to why Sh. Anand Singh having cash of Rs. 26.31 lacs has to differ the payment of a balance amount of Rs. 3.00 lacs to more than two years. Curiously the said plot was not sold to Sh. Anand. Singh but to some body else. It was further contended that though the plot was sold for Rs. 10.00 lacs as per the agreement, only an amount of Rs. 6,63,000/- was mentioned in the registered sale deed, which is again an abnormal situation. In view of the above, it is held that the AO was right in concluding that the alleged sale agreement with Sh. Anand Singh is not genuine and i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Mr. Anand Singh and registered sale deed dated 8.4.2008 and other supportive documents and evidence submitted by the assessee. 8. The AR also contended that the assessee is a property dealer who has to receive and pay various amounts on behalf of his clients i.e. purchaser and seller of the properties, therefore, if for the sake of security, the amount received is kept in the bank account for some time and subsequently it was withdrawn and given to the intended persons or sellers on behalf of the purchasers of the property, then the amount of these deposits and withdrawals cannot be treated as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. Alternatively, ld. counsel of the assessee also submitted that without prejudice to the above su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not submitted details of both the bank accounts before the Assessing Officer at the first instance. When the Assessing Officer brought out relevant details of bank accounts and cash deposits found therein, then the surrendered assessee accepted the existence of these accounts before the Assessing Officer. From the assessment order, we clearly observe that the Assessing Officer was justified in accepting the claim of the assessee pertaining to the cash deposits of Rs. 6 lakh on account of sale of plots and Rs. 2,92,372 on account of loan for car but balance cash deposits of Rs. 17,63,318 was treated as unexplained deposits and the same was brought to tax by the Assessing Officer. In the first appeal, this addition was confirmed and upheld by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and cash flow statement filed by the assessee and we are unable to see any valid reason to interfere with the findings of the authorities below in the assessment order as well as in the impugned order. 12. In view of foregoing discussion, we hold that the Assessing Officer rightly held that the amount of Rs. 17,63,318/- was unexplained cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee and the explanation offered by the assessee was not acceptable and tenable to justify and explain these unexplained cash deposits in the SB account of the assessee. At the same time, we take cognizance of this legal proposition that in this situation, the entire amount of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee cannot be treated as undisclosed inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
