9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 1243X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not sufficient since the assessee had given no valid reason as to why he kept so much in cash, when he was holding bank account. As long as the explanation of the assessee is duly substantiated, the same has to be accepted notwithstanding the fact that a different explanation was offered by the assessee in an earlier point of time. What is relevant is that the assesses explanation is duly substantiated with evidence. Whichever explanation fulfils this criteria is undoubtedly the correct and valid explanation for all purposes. Any other explanation of the assessee is of no relevance. If the assessee is able to demonstrate through evidence, in the appellate proceedings, the source of cash deposits,the same needs to be considered, exam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. After hearing both the parties, looking to the minuscule delay of just two days, I incline to condone the delay and take up appeal for hearing on merit. 3. Grounds raised by the assessee are as under: 1. The Addition made by the Ld. AO is unlawful and it is in violation of Law of Justice as addition is made without providing sufficient opportunity to appellant. The addition has been made on the basis of hypothetical situation which is not permissible to arrive at such a conclusion. Assessee had provided statement of credit card but he was not allowed further opportunity to provide evidence for source of cash deposited in Credit Card Account. 2. Further, an important point to note is that there was still time left for compl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uring the impugned year, cash deposits were made in it towards the outstanding dues. In the faceless assessment framed, addition of Rs.6,46,600/- was made on account unsatisfactory explanation being given by the assessee of the source of cash so deposited. Before the ld.CIT(A), we find that the assessee filed detailed explanation of the source which reproduced at page no.8 of the CIT(A) s order as under: Date Amount Source of cash deposits for credit card payment 23/4/2016 49000.00 Cash deposited through available cash on hand, from small savings and capital available on hand. 25/5/2016 33200.00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the assessee at all, and upheld addition for the reason that in assessment proceedings the assessee had given some other explanation of source, as being paid by his friends, who had used his card and this present explanation furnished by the assessee was not sufficient since the assessee had given no valid reason as to why he kept so much in cash, when he was holding bank account. While confirming the addition his finding in para 6.4 reads as under: 6.4 During the Assessment proceedings the appellant explained that his friend Brijesh Dadhich had used his credit card for her personal use and paid cash in his account against bill payment but did not furnish any evidence in support of the explanation. Now during the first a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t some other explanation was given in the assessment proceedings. As for the other reason given by the ld.CIT(A) for dismissing assesses explanation that there was no reason for the assessee to keep so much cash with him, I find the same to be also irrelevant. It is upto the assessee to keep how much cash as he requires, hence, this is not a criterion for making any disallowance in the income tax proceedings. For that matter, how much cash an assessee keeps cannot be reason for dismissing the explanation regarding payment made in cash. In the present case, the assessee having explained the cash deposits as withdrawals from his bank account, the Ld.CIT(A) having not found any infirmity in this explanation of the assessee, I see no reason for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
