9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eak credit in A.Y. 07-08 & 08-09. Before us, ld. A.R. has not pointed out any fallacy or error in the order of ld. CIT(A). We therefore find no reason to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(A) - Decided in favour of revenue - ITA No: 2244/AHD/2011 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2015 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri S.N. Divetia, AR Respondent : Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. This appeal filed by the Assessee is against the order of CIT(A), Gandhinagar dated 30.06.2011 for A.Y. 2006-07. 2. The relevant facts as culled out from the material on record are as under. 3. Assessee is an individual stated to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nexplained investment u/s. 69A. 2.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld.CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the addition to the extent of ₹ 15,69,300 being peak credit in bank accounts as unexplained investment u/s. 69A. 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the explanation of the appellant with regard to the cash deposits made in the bank account, though necessary evidence was produced before him. 3.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) ought not to have rejected the explanation of the appellant with regard to the impugned cash deposit in the bank. 4.1 Without prejudice to above, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in working out peak credit at ₹ 15, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld up to the date of issue of Form No. 7/12 and that Assessee s father was still in possession of the land. As far as explanation of the Assessee with respect to the cash deposits of 14,69,500/- to be out of the cash withdrawals made earlier is concerned, A.O was of the view that the statement prepared on the basis of peak working could not be accepted because the claim of cash receipts of ₹ 10,50,000/- towards part payment on sale of land was held as non genuine. He accordingly, after giving the credit of the amount received from father, made addition of ₹ 12,49,142/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O., Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) who upheld the order of A.O by holding as under:- 5.1 I have gone through the w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... statement of the assessee was recorded and he was not able to tell when and by what mode the so called loan was received. He has not been able to give how when he had small declared income and a family to support, he could have large savings from explained sources. I uphold the decision of the AO that the sources of cash deposits in the bank account are not explained. 5.2 However, the said bank accounts contains both huge cash deposits and cash withdrawals. The assessee's plea that peak credit of cash deposited should be considered appears reasonable. Before proceeding further, it is to be mentioned that the bank account has got withdrawals and deposits through cheques also. The AO has correctly treated them as explained bec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008-09 14/02/2008 Rs.15,09,276 Nil As the peak of AY 06-07 covers it. Therefore, the addition of ₹ 15,69,300/- is made and confirmed u/s.69A (instead of Sec.68, wrongly mentioned by AO) for AY 2006-07 as being unexplained monies deposited in the bank account. Although, the credits are not explained but for computation purpose, no addition on this issue is required for A.Y. 2007-08 and A.Y 2008-09 as the peak in those years is covered in the peak of unexplained money added in AY 2006-07. The AO is directed to compute the relief accordingly. Although, prima facie the working appears to be correct, the AO shall check i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
