9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard Chartered Bank. Thus, addition made was illegal and incorrect on facts and therefore same is directed to be deleted. This ground is allowed in favour of assessee. Addition on account of cash deposited in bank account - source of cash claimed to be reimbursement received from Imperial Academy and Ms. Sheetu Luthra against expenses incurred earlier by the assessee - Held that:- We do not appreciate the approach followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in this regard. While rejecting the evidence submitted by the assessee, in case the Ld. CIT(A) felt some deficiencies in the confirmation, the same should have been confronted to the assessee. Alternatively, it was well within the powers of the lower authorities to get these facts directly verified fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Sunil R. Bhandari (AR) For The Revenue : Shri B.S. Bist (Sr. DR) ORDER Per Ashwani Taneja (Accountant Member): This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai- 22 {(in short CIT(A) }, dated 19.06.2014 passed against assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 13.12.2011 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 on the following grounds: 1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [here-in-af ter referred to as Ld. CIT (Appeals)] was not justif ied and erred in upholding addition of ₹ 13.91771/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of Income Tax Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis of AIR, the AO asked the assessee to explain the cash deposit of ₹ 15,90,000/- in assessee s saving bank account. Before the AO, it was inter alia explained by the assessee that all the financial affairs of the assessee were being looked after by her husband and after his unfortunate death, the assessee faced severe financial crisis and everything in this regard had gone haywire. It was also submitted that aggregate amount of cash deposited in her saving bank account maintained with Standard Chartered Bank was ₹ 13,91,771/-. In respect to the same, it was explained that the assessee has been time to time withdrawing cash for her family needs from her another bank account maintained with the Corporation Bank, Matunga, Mumbai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash withdrawn from the Corporation Bank was utilized elsewhere. Under these circumstances, the source of cash deposited into Standard Corporation Bank account stood duly explained. The burden has been wrongly put upon the assessee to prove the negative i.e. the cash was not utilized elsewhere. Such an approach of the lower authorities was not fair. He, thus, requested for deleting the addition made by the lower authorities. 3.4. Per contra, Ld. DR reiterated the reasoning given by the AO and Ld. CIT(A). 3.5. We have gone through the orders of the lower authorities as well as submissions made by both the sides before us. Before us, Ld. DR fairly submitted that nothing is there on record to show that cash has been utilized elsewhere. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sheetu Luthra against expenses incurred earlier by the assessee. 4.1. The brief findings in this regard are that the aggregate amount of ₹ 98,507/- was explained by the assessee to have been received from M/s Imperial Academy and Ms. Sheetu Luthra on different dates on account of reimbursement of expenses which were incurred on earlier dates by the assessee. The lower authorities made the addition on the ground that nothing was brought on record to substantiate the claim of the assessee. Before us, Ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that out of the total amount, a sum of ₹ 23,150/- was on account of reimbursement received from Imperial Academy for which admittedly no evidences could be submitted. But with regard to amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ining the evidences, these should not be rejected on some surmises and conjectures. Such kind of approach leads to unfairness and shakes the faith of the taxpayers and therefore, it should be avoided. Under these circumstances, in our opinion, the assessee had duly submitted the evidences with respect to said amount. Therefore, the AO is directed to delete sum of ₹ 75,350/-. Thus, this ground is partly allowed. 5. Ground No.3: In this ground, the assessee has challenged the action of lower authorities in making addition of ₹ 20,000/-. 5.1. During the course of assessment proceedings it was noted by the AO that aggregate amount of ₹ 2,00,000/- was received by the assessee from Imperial College of Professional Studies( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
