9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iod. The cash deposited by the assessee is within the limit prescribed under above said instructions of the CBDT. Therefore, the addition sustained by the CIT(A) is accordingly deleted and the appeal filed by the assessee is accordingly allowed. - ITA NO.2922/MUM/2022 - - - Dated:- 13-3-2023 - Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'ble Judicial Member And Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'ble Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Bhupendra Shah For the Department : Shri Minal Kamble ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short Ld.CIT(A) ] dated 23.09.2022 for the A.Y.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ewed periodically. 3. Amount of these FDRS was paid before maturity and transferred to my account which was withdrawn on 01.11.2016 for marriage of my daughter (Mradul) which was held on 01.12.2016. 4. Rs. 2,50,000/- was again deposited due to demonetization in my Saving Bank A/c No. 10898973722 of SBI/Kalyan (IFSC: SBIN0000399) and same was withdrawn for expenditure of my daughter's marriage. 5. Rs. 7,84,000/- was again deposited due to demonetization in my Joint Saving Bank A/c No.726010100000082 of BOI/Etah (IFSC:BKID0007260) and same was withdrawn for expenditure of daughter's marriage. 6. The above said amount of Rs.1184407/- was out of my withdrawal from the bank. In view of the above facts you are req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹.5,34,000/-. 5. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and assessee has filed detailed submissions before the Ld.CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee Ld.CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal with the following observations: - 6.6 In view of the inconsistencies in the appellants submissions discussed above I find that the amounts deposited by the appellant into her account in December, 2016 are not fully explained. Her submission that Rs 2.50 lakhs belonged to her mother appears to be an afterthought since in her first reply she had clearly stated that the entire amount deposited in her two bank accounts were from the withdrawal of her FDs amounting to Rs 11,95,000/- She would not have forg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 due to demonetization of currency on 08.11.2016 as money which is withdrawal for the marriage of her daughter held on 01.12.2016. The said money unused after 09.11.2016 and required exchange from the Bank. 3. (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in confirming the addition of Rs.250000.00 despite the strong evidence and fact of the case. (ii) That the Ld.CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law in confirming the addition in gross violation of the principle of consistency. 4. That out of total withdrawal cash money from bank on 01.11.2016 Rs. 11,95,000.00 money partly utilized between 01.11.2016 to 08.11.2016 Rs. 4,11,000.00 being expenses incurred in marriage e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments. However, he submitted that assessee has withdrawn the money and spent the money in marriage of her daughter and it is common practice in Indian marriage of getting kanyadhan and other gifts during the marriage and it is fact on record that after the marriage assessee has excess money with her which assessee has deposited in Bank of India, Etah Branch, U.P and further she has deposited certain money received from her mother and assessee has filed the affidavit/confirmation from her mother which is placed on record at Page No. 13 of the Paper Book and further, he brought to our notice Page No.1 of the Paper Book which is synopsis filed by the assessee. 8. Ld. AR further brought to our notice Instruction No. 3/2017 of the CBDT as p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
