9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 1175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led to give any satisfactory reply against the finding of the assessing officer. As in full agreement with the observation of the assessing officer that the assessee has only shown source of income from agriculture activities. keeping in view the general practice in society that ordinarily peoples keep certain money in cash, therefore, by giving such benefits the assessee is granted benefit of Rs. 2,80,000/- and remaining addition of Rs. 22,00,000/- is upheld. Appeal of assessee is partly allowed. - ITA No. 328/SRT/2022 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2023 - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Mukesh Mandowara, A.R. For the Department : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer recorded that the assessee failed to furnish any detail, therefore, a final show cause notice was issued to the assessee on 16/11/2017. The assessee filed its reply on 22/11/2017. In the reply, the assessee stated that during the financial year, they deposited a cash of Rs. 24.80 lacs in their bank account. The assessee submitted that they have withdrawn Rs. 37.22 lacs from bank account and was having sufficient cash balance or deposit in bank. In addition to this, the assessee also received cash of sale of agricultural product of Rs. 4,93,952/-. On the basis of such submission, the assessee stated that they were having sufficient cash balance for making deposit. The reply of assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. 10/02/2015 Self-withdrawal 5,00,000 On the basis of aforesaid summary, the Assessing officer was of the view that there was no cash withdrawal prior to deposit of Rs. 10.00 lacs on 28/08/2014. Further the details shown in the above tables clearly establishes that the cash was deposited from withdrawal is baseless. Thus, the assessee has no cash in hand for deposit as claimed. Therefore, the contention of assessee that cash deposit was out of cash withdrawal is baseless. Further the pattern of cash withdrawal shows that it was for specific purpose and not for deposit. On the availability of cash which was claimed as a withdrawal, the Assessing Officer prepaid the summary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntention of assessee was not accepted and entire cash deposit was added to the income of assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee made similar submission as made before the Assessing Officer. The assessee reiterated that the cash withdrawal was more than the cash deposit. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer by taking a view that the assessee has not furnished the bank statement nor the source of details of cash deposit. In absence of such evidence, summary prepaid by assessee about cash flow statement cannot be relied and confirmed the action of Assessing Officer. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rce of cash deposit, the assessee failed to substantiate such huge cash deposits. 6. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 24.80 lacs by taking view that the only source of income shown by the assessee is agriculture income , which may have been used for house hold purpose. The assessee failed to give any satisfactory explanation and evidence of cash deposit, so cash deposit of Rs. 24.80 lacs was treated as unexplained income. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition by holding that source of cash deposit is not explained. Further cash flow summary cannot be relied as the assessee has not furnished the source of cash and cheque deposits. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
