9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the bank account has not been examined by the authorities below. Accordingly we set aside this issue to the record of AO to examine the same afresh by considering the deposit as well as explaining the withdrawals by matching the same with the business receipts and business expenditure of the assessee. As regards the gift received from the mother-in-law, it is found that the source was explained as sale of agricultural land for a consideration of ₹ 10 lakhs. However, in the sale deed the consideration is stated to be only ₹ 2,20,000/-. Though the assessee produced confirmation of the purchaser of the agricultural land regarding the consideration of ₹ 10 lakhs vide agreement dt.21.01.2008, the said confirmation was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12. The orders of the Assessing Authority and CIT (A) are against the principles of legitimate expectations entitled by the Appellant. 13. The AO and the First Appellant Authority have failed to appreciate the confirmation given by the mother-in-law who has given that amount which amount is arrived from the sale proceedings of the agriculture land. The mother-in-law received the said amount through the agreement to sell as well as the execution of sale deed from the purchaser. 14. The First Appellant Authority has failed to appreciate transaction of the agricultural land belonged the family of the mother-in-law consisted of her husband and children. The wife of the Appellant is one of the daughter of the family of Sint. Ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 7,11,915/- as cash gift from his mother-inlaw. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that there was a cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee with Axis Bank to the tune of ₹ 18,28,200/-. AO treated the said cash transaction has unexplained the cash credit u/s.68 of the Act and further the amount of ₹ 7,11,950/- claimed to be cash / gift from mother-in-law was treated as unexplained investment in the property u/s.69 of the Act. 3. Assessee challenged the action of the AO before the CIT (A), but could not succeed as the CIT (A) has confirmed the addition made by the AO. 4. Before us, Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the amount of ₹ 18,28,200/- considered as unexplained cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the gross receipts available with the assessee. Thus he has pleaded that the addition made by the authorities below may be deleted. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR has strongly relied upon the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the explanation of the assessee is very vague which is not supported by any tangible evidence. Therefore the explanation of the assessee is an after-thought when the AO has asked the assessee to explain the source of the consideration of purchase of the property being, site no.6 and further the source of cash deposit in the bank. He has further contended that the AO as well as the CIT (A) has examined the relevant record and given a finding that the assessee failed to establish the source of the cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame afresh by considering the deposit as well as explaining the withdrawals by matching the same with the business receipts and business expenditure of the assessee. 7. As regards the gift received from the mother-in-law, it is found that the source was explained as sale of agricultural land for a consideration of ₹ 10 lakhs. However, in the sale deed the consideration is stated to be only ₹ 2,20,000/-. Though the assessee produced confirmation of the purchaser of the agricultural land regarding the consideration of ₹ 10 lakhs vide agreement dt.21.01.2008, the said confirmation was not accepted by the CIT (A) on the ground that it was not produced before the AO. Apart from the confirmation of the purchaser of the agricu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
