2022 (12) TMI 535

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng officer to the income on the plea that this amount is may have been used for meeting house hold expenses. The addition is confirmed based on surmises, conjectures and on hypothetical reasonings, the same is bad in law. 2. That on the facts and in law and under the circumstances, the commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in observing that the house hold expenses are borne by the lady appellant while the house hold expenses are withdrawn by the husband of the appellant. The addition of Rs, 8,00,000/- is confirmed without considering fairly and judiciously the submissions made and evidence placed on record. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the commissioner of Income circumstances the Commissioner of I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... this submission of the assessee is unbelievable and unrealistic and held that the deposits are unexplained. He added the same u/s 68 of the Act. 4. Against the above order, the assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A). 5. The Ld. CIT(A) referred to the submissions and found it difficult to believe that the assessee had met day to day expenses by claiming that nominal amount. The Ld. CIT(A) on ad-hoc basis confirmed Rs.8,00,000/- and deleted Rs.11,45,000/-. 6. Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. I have heard both the parties and perused the record. The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that this addition of deposits found in bank statement cannot be added u/s 68 of the Act as the assessee is not req .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and in my considered opinion that the cash flow statement submitted which has been duly recognised by the Ld. CIT(A) also is covering the cash deposits in the bank account. The authorities below have made part disallowance only on presumption about the personal expenses of the assessee, which is totally based on surmises and cannot be sustained. Hence, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. Hence, the balance Rs.8,00,000/- deserves to be deleted. 10. Since, I have decided the issue in favour of the assessee, the jurisdictional ground raised by the ld. counsel for the assessee that since the assessee is not required to maintain books of account, the cash deposit found in the bank statement c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X