9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee for AY 2009-10 2010-11 to justify the cash balance is brought forward for the earlier years. From the Return of Income filed for the Assessment Year 2011-12 it is seen that the assessee has shown only income from other sources and no other income. The assessee could not establish the cash withdrawals to crack the real estate deal. Thus the assessee has not established the entire cash deposit in Nutan Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd.. Assessing Officer seems to have taken a reasonable approach and considering the circumstances of the case made a least peak credit as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act which does not require any interference in the absence of material evidence before any of the Lower Authorities. In the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d copy of acknowledgment for Income Tax Return filed for the Assessment Year 2008-09. Copy of cash book for the Assessment Years 2010- 11 2011-12. Summary of cash deposited in Nutan Nagrik Bank for the Assessment Year 2010-11 2011-12 with opening and closing balance and copy of Form 26AS. The Assessing Officer called for bank statement from Nutan Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd. by issuing notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act, which contains two bank accounts in the name of the assessee one is Saving Account and another is Current Account. Both accounts were closed in the year 2016. 2.1. The assessee submitted that he was acting as intermediary i.e. broker in land trading nearby area of his native place. The assesse furnished cash book for the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld.CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the addition of Rs.10 lakh as undisclosed investment u/s 69 of the Act 2.3 The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in observing that the appellant had not submitted any supporting documentary evidence or explained the purpose of cash deposit and immediate cheque issuance. 2.4 Without prejudice to above and in alternative, the impugned addition of Rs.10 lakhs is highly excessive and calls for reduction. 3.1 The Ld. AO has grievously erred in law and or in facts in initiating the proceedings u/s.147 and the notice u/s.148 was illegal and unlawful in view of the condition precedent were not satisfied. It is, therefore, prayed that the addition of Rs.10 lakh upheld by the CIT(A) may kindly be delet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - 400,000 3,50,000 3.2. As stated by the Assessing Officer the cash withdrawn were not old ones. The A.O. mentioned the dates and the figures. If the A.O. has rightly considered the figures, there would have been a positive cash balance as on 05/05/2010, a Negative Cash balance of Rs. 10,00,000/- as determined by the A.O. is not correct. Thus, the chart prepared by the Assessing Officer is half-truth and conveniently ignored the earlier entries to justify the negative cash balance. The table stated above reveals the link between the withdrawals and the deposits of cash in bank. In view of the above explanation, the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- made as peak credit is liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
