9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e with regard to deposit of agriculture sale proceeds in the bank. CIT(A) has made addition u/s. 69 of the Act as unexplained investment. We do not concur with such findings of CIT(A). The Revenue has not been able to show any investment made by the assessee. The term ‘investment’ is not defined in the Act, the expression has to be understood in the ordinary popular sense used in commercial parlance. Thus, the word investment means placement of a particular sum of money in business venture, property or any other possession acquired for future financial return or benefit. Deposit of money in saving bank account from various quarters cannot par take the character of investment. However, it can become a source of making investment. Thus we are of considered opinion that addition should not be made on entire bank deposits. The addition can be made only on unexplained credits in the bank accounts. Accordingly, we accept the alternate plea of the assessee. The file is remitted back to the Assessing Officer to decide this issue denovo. Decided partly in favour of assessee for statistical purpose. - ITA No. 2159/PN/2013 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2015 - Shri R.K. Panda and Shri Vikas Awasth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal assailing the findings of First Appellate Authority. 3. Shri B.B. Mane appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the authorities below in an arbitrary and justified manner have made addition of ₹ 30,17,000/-. The Assessing Officer made the addition as unexplained cash credits whereas the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in appeal held the amount as unexplained investment u/s. 69. The assessee apart from salary is having income from agriculture. The assessee is having agricultural land measuring 1 Hectare 82 Ares. The assessee has deposited sale proceeds from agriculture in his saving bank accounts. During the period relevant to the impugned assessment year, the assessee had gross receipts of ₹ 6,34,093/- from agriculture operations which includes sale proceeds on behalf of HUF as well. The assessee had taken loan and advances from friends through demand draft and cross cheques for purchase of property. The details of which were recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) but were rejected without assigning any cogent reason. The fact that the assessee had taken loans and advances has not been disbelieved by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 1,00,000/- only. Now, the assessee cannot be allowed to increase the same to more than ₹ 6,00,000/- without any basis. The ld. DR further submitted that the contention of the assessee that the amount has been withdrawn from the bank for purchase of property is also not acceptable. For purchase of property huge sums are required and the assessee has been withdrawing amount in small installments from ATM. The ld. DR further argued that mere wrong mentioning of section would not make dent in the addition which in fact should have been made u/s. 69 instead of section 68 of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has powers co-terminus to Assessing Officer and he has made necessary corrections in mentioning of the section. The ld. DR prayed for dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 5. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. Undisputedly, the assessee is maintaining four bank accounts wherein the Assessing Officer observed that amounts to the tune of ₹ 31,17,000/- were deposited during the period relevant to the assessment year 2008-09. Since, the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were deposited by the assessee in Axis Bank ₹ 50,000/- and Bank of Maharashtra ₹ 4,00,000/- on 19-11-2007 and ₹ 5,50,000/- on 24-12-2007. The assessee has further given the details of cash withdrawals amounting to ₹ 13,98,000/- during the period 16-10-2007 to 01-11-2007 and re-deposited cash in eight transactions during the period 05-11-2007 to 13-12-2007. Similarly, the assessee has given the details of various transactions in his bank accounts during the period 20-12-2007 to 15-02-2008. As per the contentions of the assessee the assessee has repaid a sum of ₹ 6,51,300/- to Mr. D.S. Desai vide cheque drawn on state Bank of Hyderabad and ₹ 5,00,000/- to Jayant Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (JSPM) vide cross account payee cheque drawn on Bank of Maharashtra.The assessee has furnished confirmation letters from all the creditors. All the creditors have supported the case of assessee. A perusal of the impugned order show that there is no discussion about the loans and advances taken by the assessee and the repayment of same. Therefore, it would not be fair to treat the entire deposits in various bank accounts of the assessee as unexplained. 8. Howev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
