9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... extent of ₹ 7,75,000/- can reasonably be treated as available with the assessee to explain the cash deposits made by him in the bank accounts during the year under consideration.Sustain the addition of ₹ 15,13,000/- made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of unexplained cash deposits found to be made by the assessee in his bank accounts to the extent of ₹ 7,38,000/- and allow partly the assessee s appeal. Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. - I.T.A. No. 331/Kol/2020 - - - Dated:- 24-7-2020 - Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) For the Assessee : Shri Suvo Chakraborty, Advocate For the Revenue : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) Durgapur dated 31.01.2020 and the solitary issue involved therein relates to the addition of ₹ 15,13,000/- made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on account of cash deposits found to be made by the assessee in his bank accounts by treating the same as unexplained. 2. The assessee in the present case is an individual who is employed with Eastern Coalfields Ltd. No return of income for the year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , addition to that extent was made by him to the total income of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act vide an order dated 14.12.2018. 3. Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and the explanation offered before the AO was reiterated on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) in support of his case that the addition made by the AO by treating the cash deposits found to be made in the bank accounts of the assessee by treating the same as unexplained was not sustainable. An alternative contention was also raised on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) to the effect that the transactions reflected in both the accounts of the assessee being circuitous in nature, addition made by the AO should to be restricted to the peak credits appearing in the relevant two accounts of the assessee. 4. The submissions made on behalf of the assessee did not find fovour with the Ld. CIT(A) who proceeded to confirm the addition of ₹ 15,81,000/- made by the AO on the issue under consideration for the following reasons given in paragraph 7 to 8.4 of his impugned order: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk. In fact, none of the amounts withdrawn from this account have reached the appellant s account with the Allahabad Bank. If the amounts transferred out through cheques were deposited in Allahabad Bank, a credit to that extent would be visible within a reasonable period of time in that account, but this is not the case. Clearly, the deposits and withdrawals in the account held with the SBI have no relation with the account with the Allahabad Bank. Moreover, there is no apparent instance of any intra-bank withdrawal and deposit. 8.3 Similarly, in the account held with the Allahabad Bank, I find that deposits are primarily in cash or have (presumably) come from FDs. These deposits have certainly not come from the appellant s account with the SBI. The remittances also are towards repayment of loans and towards FDs. I find that there is no inter-bank transfer or deposits in this account as well. The remittances are to specified accounts or destinations and they have never reached the appellant s account with the SBI. In fact, there is no apparent instance of any intra-bank withdrawal and deposit. 8.4 in view of the above facts, I am of the view that this is not a case w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee to explain the source of corresponding cash deposits. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly relied on the orders of the authorities below in support of the revenue s case on the issue under consideration. She submitted that the similar claim as now being made on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal was also made before the Ld. CIT(A) to restrict the addition to the extent of peak credits appearing in the relevant bank accounts. She contended that the same however was rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) by giving specific reasons. She invited my attention to the relevant portion of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to show that the claim of the assessee of circuitous transactions reflected in the relevant bank accounts was found to be factually incorrect by the Ld. CIT(A) and keeping in view the nature of transactions reflected in the said bank accounts, the contention of the assessee based on peak credits was rejected by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. I have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that in addition to the two bank accounts in question maintained with State Bank of India and Allhabad Bank, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
