9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 936X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not the case of NIL withdrawal by the assessee for household expenditure. Thus once the assessee has shown reasonable amount of cash withdrawals from the bank and the income of the other family members of the assessee is also not ruled out then the addition confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) of ₹ 1.00 lacs on account of short withdrawal for household expenditure is not justified and the same is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 72/ALLD/2019 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2021 - Vijay Pal Rao, Member (J) For the Appellant : Asit Hajela, CA For the Respondents : A.K. Singh, CIT (DR) ORDER PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.02.2019 of L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is subjective and not objective. He has also the questioned the power of the Assessing Officer and contended that the Income Tax law does not have any scope for making assessment on the basis of estimates and status of the assessee. Thus, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the addition sustained by the CIT(A) may be deleted. 3. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that there is no withdrawal by the assessee for household expenses. The CIT(A) has given the details of the cash withdrawal from the bank account and noted that the last withdrawal made by the assessee was on 01.02.2013 and thereafter no withdrawal up to 31st March. 4. I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The Ld. CIT(A) h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not correct for the balance of the year. Therefore, In view of the above, the addition of ₹ 3 Lakhs made by the Assessing Officer is reduced to ₹ 1,00,000/- and the appeal filed by the appellant is partly allowed. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has noted that aggregate of cash withdrawal during the year under consideration comes to ₹ 3,52,500/- and after considering this amount of withdrawal the addition made by the Assessing Officer was restricted to ₹ 1.00 lacs as against ₹ 3.00 lacs. Thus, it is clear that more than ₹ 3,50,000/- was withdrawn from the bank account during the year under consideration and it is not the case of NIL withdrawal by the assessee for household expenditure. Therefore, having regard of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
