9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I 1685 - ITAT HYDERABAD] and Smt Veena Awasthi, [ 2018 (12) TMI 206 - ITAT LUCKNOW] - As revenue has not filed any contrary judgment against the submission of assessee. The cash trail of the assessee undoubtedly stated that the sufficient cash balance was with the assessee to explain the deposit of cash in bank account. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is dismissed. Assessee appeal allowed. - Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member And Sh. Anikesh Banerjee, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal For the Respondent : Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR ORDER PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M.: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (appeals), NFAC, Delhi [in brevity of CIT(A)] date of order 19/06/2022 order passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 19861 (in brevity the AO) for assessment year 2017-18. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(5), Muktasar (in brevity the AO) order passed u/s. 143(3) date of order 18/11/2019. 2. The brief fact of the case is that during the impugned AY 2017-18, the assessee filed return of income U/s 139 of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee that the cash withdrawal of Rs. 12,00,000/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- has not been utilized by the assessee till the date of deposit in the bank account and further, it was also stated that no such part of cash is used for the purpose of purchase of immovable or movable property, marriage of any member of family etc. The copy of the undertaking is placed in the APB at page no.24 . 3.1. The AR further argued that the ld. AO issued another questionnaire wherein, the ld. AO inquired about the previous cash withdrawals of Rs. 12,00,000/- and Rs. 5,00,000/- in FY 2013-14 and FY 2014-15 respectively. The ld. AO also asked about the purpose of such cash withdrawals as made by the assessee. Copy is placed at APB page no.25-26. The assessee filed a detailed reply dated 09.08.2019 against the said notice wherein, it has been stated that she withdrew cash from her account in earlier years only for some personal use and the same was kept in hand and was not later deposited in the bank account. And, during the relevant year, the assessee deposited the said cash in hand in the bank account during the period of demonetization. The copy of the said reply is placed in the APB at page no.27-3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mitted by the assessee. The mute question before us is whether the cash deposited was coming out of the cash available with the assessee, which was kept by him for last two years. It was not brought on record why he has withdrawn so much of money and what made the assessee to keep such huge money in hand. But, on record, submitted by the assessee, we find that he had sufficient money. Even the AO could not bring any proof that the assessee has in fact utilized or applied the cash withdrawn two years back, except making a remark that there is no possibility of keeping such amount by the assessee being a NRI. He has not brought on record, why he cannot keep so much of cash in hand and no contrary findings were given by him against the submissions of assessee. AO has made the addition merely on conjectures/surmises/suspicion and no proper reasons were given why he cannot keep the cash in hand except the remark of being an NRI. In our view, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. (supra) has held that the AO cannot complete the assessment purely on guess and without any reference ITA Nos. 1727/H/14 Sri M. Prabhakar to evidence or any material ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n nor Assessing Officer could spell out in his order that cash deposits made by the assessee was from some undisclosed source. All throughout Assessing Officer has raised suspicion on the behavioural pattern of frequent withdrawal and deposits by the assessee. There is no law in the country which prevents citizens to frequently withdraw and deposit his own money. Documentary evidences furnished before the Revenue clearly clarifies that on each occasion at the time of deposit in her bank account, assessee had sufficient availability of cash which is also not disputed by the Revenue. Entire transaction of withdrawals and deposits are duly reflected in the bank account of the assessee and are verifiable from relevant records. Assessing Officer himself admitted that assessee had sufficient cash balance on each occasion at the time of deposit in her bank account on different dates during the assessment year under consideration . We have also examined the order of ld. CIT(A) and we find that his decision is based on facts on record and is supported by adequate reasoning and, therefore, we do not want to interfere with the order of ld. CIT(A) and accordingly we uphold the findings of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
