9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 525X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... restricted the addition to a sum of ₹ 16,15,261/- for reasons which already we have quoted. - Decided against assessee Whether the Tribunal should have remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for examination of the source of the said amount? - Held that:- No further enquiry on facts required to be made which could have even remotely necessitated a remand. All the facts were there before the learned Tribunal.- Decided against assessee - ITA 9 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 16-6-2016 - Girish Chandra Gupta And Asha Arora, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Smita Das De, Advocate ORDER The Court : This appeal is directed against a judgement and order dated 30TH July, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said cash withdrawal has been spent by the assessee. Therefore, we find substance in the submission of the assessee that the assessee made withdrawal from the said bank account and again deposited the same as the assessee could not utilize the withdrawal amount for the purpose of which it was withdrawn. No doubt the assessee has not stated any where the purpose for which the amount was withdrawn from time to time. The assessee has also placed the bank statement at page 7 of the paper book. Considering the said bank statement, the extract of which has been given by the Ld. CIT(A) at page 3 of the impugned order, which has already been reproduced hereinabove, we are of the considered view that the peak of the balance in the said bank acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the bank, which he did not disclose in his return. His explanation was restricted to a sum of ₹ 2,65,500/-. Therefore, the assessee could have been made liable for the balance amount under section 69 itself. The learned Tribunal has been lenient and restricted the addition to a sum of ₹ 16,15,261/- for reasons which already we have quoted. For the aforesaid reasons, the question no.(a) is answered in the affirmative and against the assessee. The question no.(b) is answered in the negative because there was no further enquiry on facts required to be made which could have even remotely necessitated a remand. All the facts were there before the learned Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
