9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of income was filed by the assessee on 25.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 3,03,940/-. The assessee is an individual having income from house property and income from other sources. The assessee has made cash deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs with HDFC Bank during demonetization period (09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016). The assessee has submitted that cash deposited during the demonetization period includes life time savings and part of cash withdrawal from bank account in earlier years for personal security and other household expenditure. The assessee further stated that her withdrawal during FY 2014-15 was Rs. 14,50,000/-. The reply of the assessee was not found tenable, therefore, cash deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs in bank account is treated as inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akhs was paid to daughter-in-law in two installments. The assessee, therefore, explained that cash deposit is from these sources. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept the explanation of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The findings of Ld. CIT(A) in para 4.4 of the order are reproduced as under: "4.4 A perusal of the above facts highlights that the explanation offered regarding the source of cash deposit before the AO was that these were her life time savings and part of cash was withdrawn from the bank in the earlier years for personal security and other household expenditures. However, during appeal it was stated that the money deposited during the demonetization period was the withdrawal of cash from the ban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticipation of settlement of the matrimonial dispute and on account of demonetization the same amount money was withdrawn to the extent of Rs. 15 lacs was deposited therefrom. Hence, the appellant's explanation is not maintainable and is accordingly rejected. Consequently, the addition of Rs. 15 lacs u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE as unexplained money is hereby confirmed." 6. Ld. Counsel for assessee reiterated the submissions made before authorities below and relied upon certain decisions of different benches of the Tribunal, copies of which are filed in the Paper Book and also relied upon the judgment of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Shiv Charan Dass Vs. CIT 126 ITR 263. 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, whatever amount was withdrawn by assessee from her bank account in the year 2014 must have been incurred by her on household expenditures. As regards, the matrimonial dispute between son of the assessee and her daughter-in-law, divorce petition was filed in October, 2014 and according to explanation of the assessee, she has taken loan of Rs. 25,16,722/- in June, 2014 for settlement of the matrimonial dispute. If the same amount was withdrawn of Rs. 18 lakhs in year 2014, it was not connected with matrimonial dispute of the son of assessee because the divorce matter was settled in August, 2019 only and assessee has paid first installment of Rs. 7 lakhs in August, 2019 and, thereafter, the balance amount was to be paid in two installment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
