9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 915X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osited cash of Rs.29,26,000/ in the bank account maintained with Standard Chartered Bank, Howrah. On examination of the bank statement he found that the assessee had deposited cash totaling to Rs.29,26,000/- during the period 01.04.2007 to 31.03.2008. On a show cause notice from the AO the assessee filed an explanation on 21.12.2010 which reads follows :- The amount was withdrawn from bank for purchase of goods for business expenses. If the withdrawal was not fully used then the same was deposited again with the bank. ITO. Ward-51(4), Kol vs Deb Kumar Jana A.Yr.2008-09 The AO rejected the explanation of the assessee holding that the withdrawal from the bank account did not tally with the deposit and purchases made by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, he also observed that there was enough merit in the contention of the assessee that the entire deposits cannot be added back. He relied on the decision of the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs Md.Asraf Ali (supra) wherein it was held as under :- We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned Representatives of the parties and perused the impugned orders of the authorities below. The said amount aggregating to Rs.26,57,618/- deposited in the Standard Chartered Bank, Salt Lake Branch, Kolkata was admittedly not disclosed in the books of account. The assessee has also admittedly failed to disclose the source of the deposits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the learned CIT(A) is not j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entered in the books of accounts of the assessee and the Tribunal also considered the fact that assessee has made cash deposits as well as cash withdrawals from time to time from the bank account. The assesse had also not been able to explain the source of deposits in the bank account. The Tribunal thereafter was of the view that only the peak of the balance in the bank account should be considered as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the IT Act. Therefore the ld. CIT(A) following the above orders of the Tribunal directed the AO to restrict the addition to the peak balance of Rs.4,81,228/- and delete the balance addition of Rs.24,44,772/-. 3.4. Being aggrieved by the said order of the ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is in appeal before us. 4. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
