9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after referred to as 'the Act') dated 12.12.2018. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal: - "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in making an addition of Rs. 38,61,083/- u/s 69A of Income Tax Act 1961. 2. It is therefore prayed that above addition made by the Assessing Office and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 3. The appellant craves leave to add or alter or delete any of the ground or grounds of appeal at the time of the hearing before Your Honour." 2. Facts in brief are that assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for assessment year 2016-17 on 17.01.2017 declaring income of Rs. 3,61,610/- and agricultural income for ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noted that assessee furnished withdrawal of Rs. 42,42,700/- from his bank but no day-to-day details of expenses were furnished. The assessee has shown loan statement as a home loan of Rs. 36.00 lakh from Bank of Baroda. The assessee has made withdrawal of Rs. 1.00 to Rs. 3.00 lakhs which shows that cash balance of Rs. 25.00 lakh was not available with the assessee. In the balance-sheet, the asset in the property was increased, though assessee himself disclosed that loan taken to buy agricultural land in cash. Thus, the withdrawal of Rs. 25.00 lakh on 27.04.2015 was not available as cash-in-hand. The assessee has shown cash deposit of Rs. 4,67,000/- in his bank account maintained in Bank of Baroda but details source is not furnished. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cash or cheque was credited in the books of account represented in the addition. Thus, the conditions of Section 68 are not fulfilled and addition are liable to be deleted. In the show cause notice dated 02.12.2018, the Assessing Officer accepted that assessee made withdrawal from bank of Rs. 42,42,700/-, however, assessing officer stated in his show cause as to why the cash-in-hand of Rs. 45,38,189/- should not be added in the income of assessee under section 68 of the Act. It is absurdity of Assessing Officer in treating disclosed cash-in-hand of Rs. 45,38,189/- which is reflected as asset of cash credit under section 68. The assessee further submitted that cash-in-hand was generated out of loan availed from bank accounts and the source ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lance available with him. The assessee explained the source of closing balance with the help of cash withdrawal out of loan received by assessee that he has made sufficient withdrawals from his bank accounts. The Assessing Officer noted that assessee has cash withdrawal of Rs. 42,42,700/- during the period from 27.04.2015 to 10.07.2015 out of which Rs. 25.00 lakh was withdrawn by assessee on 27.04.2015. The entire cash-in-hand for long period was not accepted by Assessing Officer and added to Rs. 38,61,083/-. The ld. CIT(A) concurred with the finding of Assessing Officer that long time gap between withdrawal and showing it in the closing balance as on 31.03.2016 remained unexplained. The theory of human probability as has been laid down by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therwise clearly reflected in the bank accounts of assessee. Further there is clear withdrawal from the bank accounts in cash, the assessee right from the beginning has taken a plea that he intended to purchase some agricultural land at his native place and cash was withdrawn for making payment to seller. However, the deal was not materialized and cash was clearly available with the assessee. The only reason for lower authorities to disbelieve the theory of cash flow as to why the cash remained in hand for long period. There is no restriction or limit for keeping cash at home (hand). The Assessing Officer has not brought any adverse material or evidence that such cash was invested anywhere else. The Ld.AR of the assessee submits that once t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Similarly, in the case of S. R. Ventakaratnam (supra) the source was not explained. 7. I have considered the rival submissions of the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully. I have also gone through various documents filed by the assessee and deliberated on various case laws. The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 38,61,083/- by taking view that details working of cash balance of Rs. 42,42,700/- on account of withdrawal from 27.04.2015 to 10.04.2015 from his different bank accounts are not acceptable as that it remains in cash-in-hand till the end of the year. Though, the assessing officer added cash in hand under section 68, however, the ld CIT(A) while confirming such addition treated it under sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
