9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustified in concluding that the assessee had failed to explain the source of cash deposits of Rs. 55,01,000/-? Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income for A.Y 2013-14 on 10.07.2014, declaring an income of Rs. 2,69,980/-. The case of the assessee was thereafter selected for scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 3. On a perusal of the ITS details of the assessee, it was observed by the A.O that he had made cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 55.01 lac in his bank accounts, viz. (i). SB A/c with Bank of Maharashtra, Branch Gurgaon :Rs. 35,01,000; and (ii). SB A/c with Gurgaon Gramin Bank, Branch Gurgaon : Rs. 20,00,000/-. As the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings failed to furnish any explanation as regards the nature and source of the aforesaid cash deposits, therefore, the A.O treated the amount of Rs. 55.01 lacs as the assessee's unexplained income and added the same to his returned income. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A). During the course of the appellate proceedings the assessee furnished certain additional documentary evidence U/rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules 1962, viz (i). copy of the sale deeds of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him on sale of a plot at Shanti Nagar, Gurgaon. However, the A.O did not find favour with the aforesaid claim of the assessee. It was observed by the A.O, that, as the assessee had received the sale proceeds of Rs. 24 lac at the time of registration of his aforesaid sale deed on 29.03.2013, therefore, his claim of having deposited an amount of Rs. 20,15,000/- on 09.03.2013 in his bank account out of the aforesaid sale proceeds could not be accepted. It was further observed by the A.O that surprisingly the assessee had on 09.03.2013 also made a cash deposit of Rs. 20,00,000/- in his bank account with Gurgaon Gramin Bank, Branch: Gurgaon. Backed by his aforesaid observations, the A.O, in the course of the remand proceedings, was of the view, that the claim of the assessee that the cash deposits in his aforementioned bank accounts were sourced from the amounts that were available with him on sale of the aforesaid properties could not be accepted. 5. After considering the 'remand report' filed by the A.O a/w the rejoinder of the assessee, the CIT(A), was of the view, that though the sale deeds did make a mention about the money given in advance, however, as neither was it discernible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds the source of the cash deposits in his respective bank accounts, therefore, the same could not be sustained and was liable to be set-aside. 7. Per contra, the ld. Departmental representative ("D.R", for short) relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. Issue involved in the present appeal hinges around the explanation of the assessee as regards the source of the cash deposits in his respective bank accounts. As observed by us hereinabove, it has been the claim of the assessee, that the cash deposited in his bank accounts during the year under consideration was primarily sourced from the sale proceeds of the properties that were sold by him, viz. (i) sale of plot at Shanti Nagar, Gurgaon; and (ii) sale of house at Chandan Nagar, Gurgaon; which are stated to have been received by him in advance i.e prior to the execution of the respective sale deeds, as under : Sr. No. Particulars 1. Deposit of an amount of Rs. 10,02,000/- in bank account with Bank of Maharashtra, Branch : Gurgaon, which is stated to have been made o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ook place, is not convincing enough." As is discernible from the aforesaid, it is a matter of a fact borne from record that the CIT(A) had admitted that though the sale deeds did mention about the money having been given in advance, but then, he was of the view, that as the same were silent as to when and in what manner such sale consideration was given to the assessee as an advance, therefore, the unsubstantiated claim of the assessee of having received part/full sale consideration qua sale of the properties in question did not merit acceptance. 9. After having deliberated at length on the issue in hand in the backdrop of the observations of the lower authorities and the contentions advanced by the ld. Authorized representatives for both the parties, we are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to their view that the assessee had not received any part of the sale proceeds qua the sale of the properties in question prior to the date of execution of the respective sale deeds. As observed by us hereinabove, the CIT(A) had clearly admitted that the sale deeds did mention about the money having been given in advance. But after so observing, the CIT(A), was of the view, that as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
