9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 958X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hra, AR For The Revenue : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR ORDER Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the revenue against the separate orders of the CIT(A)- 1, Bhubaneswar both dated 13.7.2017 for the assessment years 2012-13 2013-14, respectively. 2. The common ground involved in these appeals is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 50,00,000/- for the assessment year 201-2013 and ₹ 44,66,000/- for the assessment year 2013-14 made by the Assessing Officer towards income from undisclosed sources. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has maintained three bank accounts in his name. The details of credits in the account for the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee to explain the sources and nature of such huge credits in bank accounts with evidence. In reply, the assessee stated that the deposits were out of withdrawals. The assessee filed written submission explaining the credits in the three bank accounts. The explanation of the assessee was not acceptable to the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the assessee has withdrawn more than the deposits. He observed that due to large number of debit and credit entries appearing in the bank statements, the real/genuine income is camouflaged. The assessee was not able to give satisfactory explanation to each credit and debit entries. The Assessing Officer relied various case laws, wherein, it has been emphasized the point ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee is carrying on, i.e. transport business', is a cash intensive business and frequent cash withdrawals are made which are deposited back if there is no requirement for payment. It is contended that the so-called peak credit method adopted by the AO is totally misleading and the addition based on the same should be deleted. 7. Similar submissions were made by the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14 except change in amounts. 8. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) deleted the addition for the assessment year 2012-13, by observing as under: 5. I have considered the facts of the case. The assessee has also submitted copies of all the bank accounts and consolidated cash withdrawal and deposi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent in the name of peak credit. Going by the actual facts of the case, I do not see any justification to make an addition in the name of peak credit especially when the deposits are apparently explainable from out of withdrawals. In this view of the matter, the addition of ₹ 44,60,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits is deleted. 9. Similarly, the CIT(A) deleted the addition for the assessment year 2013-14, observing as under: 5. I have considered the facts of the case. The assessee has also submitted copies of all the bank accounts and consolidated cash withdrawal and deposit statement. The assessee has also produced a cash-flow statement (cash book) which shows that the cash deposits were made out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the name of peak credit especially when the deposits are apparently explainable from out of withdrawals. In this view of the matter, the addition of ₹ 44,60,000/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits is deleted. 10. Before us, ld D.R. relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer whereas ld A.R. supported the orders of the CIT(A). 11. We find that no specific error could be pointed out by the ld D.R. in the order of the CIT(A). The ld D.R could not bring any cogent and positive material on record to controvert the findings of the CIT(A) that there were adequate cash withdrawals to explain the subsequent deposits in the bank. Therefore, we find no good reason to interfere with the orders of the CIT(A). Hen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
