9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the income tax record which is already available with the department and the account copy of the bank account, which was also furnished by the assessee at the time of original assessment proceedings. Furnishing of Aadhar card is fortifying the identity already accepted in original assessment and the same cannot be treated as additional evidence. Since the assessee has furnished the copy of the bank account to establish the balance available and there was sufficient balance in the account to advance the amount of ₹ 10 lakhs to the assessee, CIT(A) has rightly observed that the assessee has satisfied the identity, credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction and accordingly deleted the addition. No reason to interfere with the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the same is upheld. The appeal of the revenue on this ground is dismissed. Addition of credits in the bank account of ING Vysya - deposits relates to sales - additional evidence - HELD THAT:- Neither the CIT(A) nor the AO reconciled the deposits made in the bank account with the sales declared by the assessee in the P L account and verified whether the deposits in the ING Vysya bank and other bank accounts relate to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ire specific adjudication. 3. Ground No.2 is related to the addition of ₹ 16,98,150/- pertaining to cash deposits in Axis Bank. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of food products and filed his return of income declaring total income of ₹ 5,20,420/- and the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on total income of ₹ 90,91,734/-. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that there were total credits of ₹ 27,06,800/- in Axis Bank A/c No.069010100362054 and this account was not disclosed to the department. The assessee explained that the credits in the bank account represent the trade transactions and the amounts were deposited by customers from various locations of the state, hence requested not to make the addition. However, the assessee could not produce any evidence to support the explanation of the assessee to prove the credits in the bank account were in fact related to business transactions. The break-up of the creditors of ₹ 27,06,800/- is as follows : Cash Deposits - 14,81,6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO or before the CIT(A) to establish that the genuineness and the source of credits made in the bank accounts. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has held that the cash deposits made in the bank account were not business transactions and they were unaccounted deposits. Since, there were withdrawals as well as deposits in the bank account it is reasonable to hold that the deposits were made out of cash withdrawals and the deposits and withdrawals are circulation of the same money. Therefore, we are of the considered view that in the facts and circumstances of frequent cash deposit and the withdrawal, it is correct to make the addition of peak credit balance, but not the entire deposits which the Ld.CIT(A) has directed the AO. Hence, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) and the same is upheld. The appeal of the revenue on this ground is dismissed. 7. Ground No.3 is related to the addition of ₹ 10,00,000/- unsecured loans received from the creditor, Alluri Sharada. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has received the sum of ₹ 10 lakhs from Smt.A.Sharada by cheque No.58534. The assessee was asked to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment as discussed in the assessment order, the assessee had furnished the details of confirmation which was accepted by the AO and the same was not disputed at the time of original assessment. No lapse or the defect was found in the confirmation letter at the time of reassessment proceedings. Therefore, the AO cannot agitate against the proof of identity furnished before the Ld.CIT(A). Even otherwise, the Ld.CIT(A) is competent to entertain the additional evidence on his own and conduct enquiries as provided u/s 250(4) of the Act. In the instant case, what the commissioner has examined is the income tax record which is already available with the department and the account copy of the bank account, which was also furnished by the assessee at the time of original assessment proceedings. Furnishing of Aadhar card is fortifying the identity already accepted in original assessment and the same cannot be treated as additional evidence. Since the assessee has furnished the copy of the bank account to establish the balance available and there was sufficient balance in the account to advance the amount of ₹ 10 lakhs to the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly observed that the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out remanding the same to the AO. Therefore, argued that the Ld.CIT(A) entertained the additional evidence without giving opportunity to the AO, hence the order of the Ld.CIT(A) is unacceptable and accordingly argued that the same should be remitted back to the file of the AO. On the other hand the Ld.AR relied on the orders of the Ld.CIT(A). 14. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. In the instant case, in ING Vysya Bank, there were credits to the extent of ₹ 42,24,817. Though the assessee stated that the deposits in the bank account represented the sales, no evidence was produced by the assessee before the AO to support that the deposits in the bank account actually represent the trade transactions. Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee furnished the confirmation letters from four parties, Sri M.Rajeswara Rao, Sri K.Praveen Babu, Sri Babu Rao and A.Sharada supporting that the deposits in the bank account are trade transactions. This account is undisclosed account. Neither the Ld.CIT(A) nor the AO reconciled the deposits made in the bank account with the sales declared by the assessee in the P L account and verif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perused the material placed on record. The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition with the following observations : In view of the above, I am of the view that there is no unexplained deposit in IndusInd Bank A/c. Assessing Officer had not specifically identified any such cash deposit as unexplained. Assessing Officer acknowledged in the assessment order about availability of confirmation letters regarding sales. Assessing Officer did not cause any enquiry in respect of such confirmations though some of them contained full address, PAN etc. Further, total cash credit in Induslnd Bank during the relevant Assessment Year was only ₹ 670,450/-, others are cheque transactions (₹ 9,86,O11/-) RTGS/NEFT transactions (₹ 5,11,297/-). All of them totalled to ₹ 21,67,758/-. During the assessment proceedings, the AO has called for the complete details such as nature of deposits, sources of the deposit along with the supporting evidence. The assessee did not furnish any supporting evidence and the assessee has furnished some of the details regarding the sales. The Ld.CIT(A) observed that all the transactions were trade transacti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
