9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n'ble Commissioner Appeal Karnal has wrongly assumed the total sales consideration of agriculture land as Income which is illegal and unjustified." 3. The only effective ground in this appeal is against the sustaining of addition of Rs.17,10,000/- in respect of cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee. FACTS OF THE CASE 4. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the Assessing Officer ["AO"] was in possession of the information regarding cash deposited by the assessee in his bank account No.00000010099239358 maintained with State Bank of India, Model Town, Panipat amounting to Rs.17,10,000/- The case of the assessee was re-opened and a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act"] was issued to the assessee after getting the requisite approval from the Competent Authority. In response thereto, Ld. Counsel for the assessee, Shri. J.B.Sharma, Advocate attended the proceedings. The assessee was engaged in the business of the Commission Agent of food grains. The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposited in his bank account during the course of assessment proceedings. In response thereto, the assessee filed his reply and stated that he ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amined. The case was discussed with the AR of the assessee. The details of cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee is as under;- Sr.No. Date Amount (In Rs.) Sr.No. Date Amount (In Rs.) 1. 29.05.2009 60,000/- 5. 14.07.2009 3,00,000/- 2. 05.06.2009 3,00,000/- 6. 15.07.2009 2,00,000/- 3. 03.07.2009 1,50,000/- 7. 21.07.2009 50,000/- 4. 11.07.2009 4,50,000/- 8. 28.07.2009 2,00,000/- Total 17,10,000/- 2. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee was required to explain the cash deposit of Rs. 17,10,000/- made in his saving bank account during the financial year 2009-10 relevant to assessment year 2010-11. In this regard a written submission has been furnished by the assessee on 10.08.2017 which is reproduced as under:- 1. "Regarding cash deposited into bank:- The assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 1710000/- on different dates into State Bank of India, Panipat during the F.Y. 2009-10. The assessee deposited the said amount from his own funds/cash in hand. 2. That the assessee had sold a property/land on dt 05.06.2008 for a sum of Rs. 2500000/-. Further, the assessee gave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will back out or go out from the term and conditions of said agreement then entire advance money will be forfeited by the seller and if the seller will back out then seller have to repay double of the advance money received. But in the instant case no such type of conditions have been adopted by any of the seller/purchaser. iii). Naveen Kumar is the real nephew of the assessee and thus, the content of the affidavit is not so much reliable and it appears after thought idea of the assessee and is a concocted story. iv). The assessee is commission agent of food grains and has shown netinterest income of Rs. 13,266/- for the period under consideration. Thus, how can it may be possible that assessee has not charged any interest on the amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-. v) As regard the re-payment was made by Sh. Naveen Kumar there is no credit worthiness of Sh. Naveen Kumar for the period under consideration as the source of re-payment was explained by way of raising loans in cash as per detail below:- Loan raised from Sh. Mahender brother-in- law of Sh, Naveen Rs. 5,00,000/- (in cash), Rs. 5,00,000/- (in cash) from Sh. Sohan Uncle (Phupha ji) of Sh. Naveen Kumar and Rs. 6,00,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not taxable as it falls within the purview of exemption provided by the Act. However, under section 68 of the Act, where any amount is found credited in the accounts of the assessee relating to any previous year, the same can be charged to income tax as the income of the assessee of that year where the explanation offered by the assessee about the nature and its source is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer. In such a case there is prima facie evidence against the assessee, viz. the receipt of money and if, he fails to rebut the said evidence, it can be used against him by holding that it was the receipt of income nature. Again, support is drawn from CIT vs Jalan Timbers 223 ITR 11, 17 (Gauhati) wherein it is clearly held that in order to establish the fact of receipt of cash-credit, the assessee must prove three important conditions." 1. Identity of the cash creditors. 2. Genuineness of the transaction. 3. Capability of the person giving the cash credit. During the proceedings assessee was not able to prove the identity of the cash creditors and also not able to prove the genuineness of the transactions with the supporting evidence. Thus, the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
