9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... then the source of such cash deposits can be said to be explained by the assessee. It is a well-settled principle of law that once there are substantial cash withdrawals which have been made by the assessee from his bank account, then the source of cash deposits in the same bank account can be presumed to have been made from the earlier cash deposits, unless certain specific facts are brought on record to establish that the assessee has spent or invested the aforesaid amount so that such cash is not available with the assessee for redeposit. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the additions are liable to be deleted. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. - Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, A.R. For the Respondent : Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, (in short Ld. CIT(A) ), Ahmedabad Appeal No. CIT(A)-13/Intl. Taxn./Ahd/472/2017- 18 vide order dated 09.08.2019 passed for Assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar facts were stated. The AO has stated that such additional evidences should not be admitted only on the ground that various opportunities were provided in assessment proceedings but on merits have not given any comment that cash deposit addition is required to be sustained or not after considering appellant's explanation as well as evidences. The appellant has submitted copy of computation of income for return of income filed on 28/03/2014 and in such computation, only two banks were disclosed i.e ICICI bank and IDBI Bank. The appellant has not disclosed Kotak Mahindra Bank in the list of bank details in return of income. The appellant has submitted copy of Profit loss account as Annexure D of paper book but such details do not contain copy of balance sheet for year under consideration. The appellant at paper book page no 44 45 has stated to have submitted ledger account with Kotak Mahindra Bank(KMB) but same are bank loan accounts and not ledger account of saving bank account number 08130140024196. The appellant has submitted copy of cash book from 01st April 2011 to 31st March 2012 from which it is apparent that appellant has not received freight income in cash. The maj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order) it is evident that the Assessing Officer has made no adverse comments on merits of the case. Further, the Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to cash flow statement (Pages 69-70 of Paper Book), bank statement of Kotak Mahindra Bank (Pages 46-49 of Paper Book) and cash book (Pages 7-43 of Paper Book) and contended that the cash deposits were out of cash withdrawals from bank and cash on hand. Therefore, the source of cash deposits stands duly established. The assessee had made cash withdrawals from time to time and the available cash on hand was the source of deposits in question. It was submitted that the Assessing Officer has not made any adverse comments on the additional evidences while furnishing the Remand Report. Further, it was submitted that the Department has not brought on record any clinching evidence whatsoever to disbelieve or disprove the fact that assessee had sufficient cash available in cash book on the dates when the cash deposits in question were made. Further, it was submitted that the Department has not brought on record any concrete evidence to demonstrate that cash withdrawal was utilised for any other purpose or was invested elsewhere. Further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not re-deposited by the assessee in its bank account. In the case of Shailesh Rasiklal Mehta176 Taxman 270 (Gujarat) , the High Court held that once Tribunal deleted addition holding that Assessing Officer having accepted withdrawal of cash from assessee's bank by 'M', there was no question of treating deposit in question as unexplained and, therefore, no addition was warranted. In the case of Sudhirbhai Pravinkant Thaker 88 taxmann.com 382 (Ahmedabad -Trib.) , ITAT held that when assessee had demonstrated that he had withdrawn cash from bank and there was no finding by Authorities below that this cash available with assessee was invested or utilized for any other purpose, it was not open to authority to make addition on basis that assessee failed to explain source of deposits. In the case of Ajit Bapu Satam147 taxmann.com 222 (Mumbai - Trib.) , the ITAT held that where cash withdrawn by assessee during demonetisation period from its bank account was deposited in very same bank account and both cash withdrawal and deposit were duly substantiated from bank statement of very same branch of bank and there was no findings by lower authorities that cash available with ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
