9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 1247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT (A) vide Para 3 of his order, has erred in confirming addition made by Ld. AO wherein he had erred in making addition of Rs.7,50,000/- by erroneously holding that the cash deposit in bank is undisclosed income of the appellant on following grounds : 2.1 That the above addition is erroneous since the source of cash deposit was duly explained. 2.2 That the cash deposit in bank is out of withdrawls from the same bank account of the appellant. 2.3 That the addition made, without finding out any utilization of withdrawl of cash, is illegal. 2.4 That the above addition is against the provisions of law and facts. 4. The Assessing Officer made the addition of Rs.7,60,000/- f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount. So later on he deposited the amount with his saving bank accounts on different dates. 6. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the above reply of the assessee and, therefore, he treated the amount of Rs.7,60,000/- as income of the assessee from unexplained sources and was, accordingly, added to the total income of the assessee. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT (Appeals) and took the following lines of arguments : 1. First of all, it is clarified that the transactions in question total to Rs.7,50,000/- instead of Rs.7,60,000/- as totaled by Ld. A.O. as the 1st transaction is actually for Rs.50,000/- dated 30.06.2006 instead of Rs.60,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation that appellant withdrew Rs.7,50,000/- in cash from his bank account on 27.01.2006 and deposited back the same amount of Rs.7,50,000/- in the bank account within reasonable time. 6. The appellant duly explained the above referred source to the Ld. A.O. copy of relevant submission to Ld. A.O. is enclosed at Page No. 8 of the paper book. However, Ld. A.O. failed to appreciate this submission and made the addition of Rs.7,50,000/-. 7. It is further submitted that the appellant nave invested or used the above referred withdrawl of Rs.7,50,000/- except re-depositing the same in bank account. Even the Ld. A.O. could not find out any investment made out by the appellant out of this withdrawl of Rs.7,50,000/-. In fact, the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HDFC bank account of the assessee. As per the statement of accounts submitted by the assessee it is clear that he had withdrawn a sum of Rs.7,50,000/- on 27.1.2006 from his saving bank account No.1071070000164 maintained with HDFC Bank Ltd, Sector 8, Chandigarh. As regards the purpose of withdrawal it is stated by the assessee that this amount was withdrawn from the bank for purchase of property but he could not materialize a suitable deal and finally redeposited back the cash in the bank account on different dates. It is seen that the assessee withdrew Rs.7,50,000/- in cash from his bank account on 27.1.2006 and deposited back the same amount of Rs.7,50,000/- in the bank account within a gap of few months. In our view, the explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
