9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at on 14.9.2007 the assessee has deposited ₹ 4,05,000/- only. So, if the assessee has cash of ₹ 10 lakhs on 14.9.2007 i.e. ₹ 9 lakhs from encashment of two cheques and ₹ 1 lakh as cash payment, then why only ₹ 4.5 lakhs was deposited and then money has been deposited in various installments as stated above. No explanation was given for this discrepancy. Therefore, in our opinion, the assessee has not a been able to satisfactorily explain the deposits of cash and accordingly we confirm the order of CIT(A). - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 520/CHD/2012 - - - Dated:- 6-3-2014 - SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Hardesh Jindal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in cash from the above two items whereas only 12.12 lacs were deposited in the said amount. The remaining cash was used otherwise for business purposes or for savings u/s 80 C. 4. The Assessing Officer examined the sale deed in respect of the above property and noted that entire sale proceeds of ₹ 10 lakhs was received through cheque No. 684555 dated 14.9.2007 and no such amount was deposited in the bank. It was further noted that profit from the boutique was ₹ 1,54,960/-, therefore, in the opinion of Assessing Officer the source of cash is not acceptable and accordingly he added this sum to the income of the assessee. 5. On appeal before CIT(A), submissions and explanation given before the Assessing Officer were reiter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No. 684555 for ₹ 10 lakhs and instead issued two cheques bearing Nos.684557 dated 14.9.2007 for ₹ 5,00,000/- and 684558 dated 14.9.2007 for ₹ 4,00,000/- drawn on saving bank account No. 1002619886 with State Bank of India, Model Town, Ambala City. The cheques were bearer against which cash was withdrawn on 14.9.2007. A certificate in this regard from Shri Rajiv Kalra was also furnished before him, copy of which is available at pages 22 of the paper book. He contended that actually only cash was received against the sale of property. The cheques have been debited to the account of Shri Rajiv Kalra and this should not have been doubted. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of CIT(A). He further submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18.03.2008 1,45,000 24.03.2008 2,10,000 Total 12,12,000 9. So, if the assessee has cash of ₹ 10 lakhs on 14.9.2007 i.e. ₹ 9 lakhs from encashment of two cheques and ₹ 1 lakh as cash payment, then why only ₹ 4.5 lakhs was deposited and then money has been deposited in various installments as stated above. No explanation was given for this discrepancy. Therefore, in our opinion, the assessee has not a been able to satisfactorily explain the deposits of cash and accordingly we confirm the order of CIT(A). 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
