9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee, still, section 69A would not be applicable as the transactions are duly recorded in the bank statements. Thus, in our view the provisions of section 69A would not be applicable. Therefore, the addition made invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act is unsustainable. Also we are convinced that the source of each credit entry appearing in the respective NRO/NRE bank accounts in India stands properly explained by the assessee. When the assessee has furnished additional evidences having crucial bearing on determination of the dispute, learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have examined them properly without rejecting them on flimsy ground. Considering the close proximity of the aforesaid withdrawal and the cash deposits, in our view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer noticed that in the year under consideration there are number of credit entries in the bank account. He, therefore, called upon the assessee to explain the source of deposits. In response to the query raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessee furnished its submission explaining the source of credit entries appearing in the bank account. However, the Assessing Officer was not convinced with the submissions of the assessee. Accordingly, he added back aggregate amount of Rs. 1,40,09,733/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The assessee contested the aforesaid addition before learned Commissioner (Appeals). After considering the submissions of the assessee, learned Commissioner (Appeals) granted partial rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osits in the Dubai bank account. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) declined to accept the additional evidence merely for the fact that the assessee has not made any application under Rule 46A. He submitted, it is well settled that there is no requirement for making an application under Rule 46A for admission of addition evidences. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions: 1. CIT Vs. Text Hundred India Pvt. Ltd., 239 CTR 263 (Del. HC) 2. CIT Vs. Virgin Securities Credits (P) Ltd., 332 ITR 396 (Del. HC) 3. Mayur Batra Vs. ACIT, ITA No.7586/Del/2019, order date 28.11.2022 (Del. Trib.) 6. He submitted, there cannot be any doubt regarding the credit entries of Rs.1,25,16,533/- as it has been transferred from assessee s bank account i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relying upon the observations of the Assessing Officer and learned Commissioner (Appeals), learned Departmental Representative submitted, in the proceedings before departmental authorities, the assessee neither filed evidences or explanation to establish the source of deposits made in the bank account. Though, multiple opportunities were granted to the assessee to prove the credit entries, however, the assessee was unable to explain. Therefore, he submitted, addition made is justified. 8. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions in the light of the decisions relied upon and perused the materials on record. Undisputedly, while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs.1,40,09,733/- u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined addition to the extent of Rs.1,32,25,533/-. The assessee has explained the source of the aforesaid amount as under: 1. Rs. 1,25,16,533 - transfer from assessee s bank account in Dubai to NRO account in India. 2. Rs.2,42,000 - cash deposits made during demonetization period out of earlier cash withdrawals. 3. Rs. 3,00,000 - amount received from daughter 4. Rs. 1,67,000 - amount received from Ms. Sugandha Saigal on cancellation of a hotel booking. 12. It is necessary to examine, whether the aforesaid explanation of the assessee explaining the source of deposits in the bank accounts are supported by the evidence or not. As regards transfer of Rs.1,25,16,533/- from the Dubai bank account to NRO account in India, on a careful perusal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. When the assessee has furnished additional evidences having crucial bearing on determination of the dispute, learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have examined them properly without rejecting them on flimsy ground. The decisions cited before us by learned counsel appearing for the assessee clearly support this view. Thus, in our view, the source of deposit of Rs. 1,25,16,533/- stands explained. 13. As regards cash deposit of Rs.2,42,000/-, it is the contention of the assessee that out of earlier cash withdrawals made in October, 2016, the amounts were deposited due to declaration of demonetization. We find the aforesaid contention of the assessee believable. It is seen from the materials on record that the assessee is having certain me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
