9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee has to travel six years prior to the date of the search for explaining cash withdrawal, without any credible explanation for the same. As fot the petitioner s wife is concerned, the petitioner has not produced her bank accounts to establish the source of the said funds (Rs. 15,84,000/-), which the assessee claimed belonged to his wife. As observed above, the question whether the source of the cash has been explained is, essentially, a question of fact. In the given facts, we are also unable to accept that the findings of the learned ITAT are perverse. No such question of law has been projected by the assessee as well. Decided against assessee. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA For the Petitioner Through: Mr Prakash Shah, Mr Mihir Deshmukh, Mr Rajat Mittal and Mr Suprateek Neogi, Advocates. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Aseem Chawla, SSC with Ms. Pratishtha Chaudhary, Advocate. VIBHU BAKHRU, J. (ORAL) 1. The appellant (hereafter the assessee) has filed the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) impugning an order dated 24.07.2023 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned Assessing Officer has grossly erred in making an addition of Rs. 37,20,100/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A rws 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without any proper reasoning, in a arbitrary manner. 5. During the proceedings before the learned CIT (A), the assessee submitted that out of the total cash seized, Rs. 39,94,196/- belonged to him, whereas Rs. 19,36,000/- belonged to his mother and Rs. 15,84,000/- belonged to his wife. The said contentions were rejected by the learned CIT (A) and the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 02.02.2021 by the CIT (A), inter- alia, holding as under: 4.2.5 1 have considered facts of the case as well as written submissions of the appellant. I have perused copy of Income Tax Return filed by Smt. Neelam Sood for AY 2018-19 as well as her order w/s 143 (3) of Income Tax Act. The return of income was filed on 30.10.2018 i.e. after the search on 31.01.2018. In the return of income, the appellant has declared income from salary of Rs. 12,00,000/- and income from other sources of Rs. 1,92,788/-. The return of income does not in any way justify that the source of cash found during search belonged to Smt. Neelam Sood. The Assessing Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12,00,000/-. The source of the cash has not been proved by any cogent evidence such as withdrawal from the bank or any other earnings which have been duly disclosed to tax. 6. Hence, in the absence of any forceful, convincing, tangible, persuative evidence on record, we decline to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT (A) 8. Aggrieved by the aforesaid findings, the assessee has preferred the present appeal, projecting the following substantial questions of law for consideration of this Court: a. Whether the Hon ble ITAT has erred both in law and facts for not considering that the Assessment Order is void ab initio as the same is issued without the Document Identification Number, which is a clear contravention to CBDT Circular No. 12/2019 dated 14th August, 2019? b. Whether the Hon ble ITAT has erred in law and facts for confirming the addition of Rs. 37,20,100/- without noticing that no independent inquiry has been conducted by the lower authorities despite filing the confirmations of the assessed persons and Affidavit filed by the Appellant? c. Whether the Hon ble ITAT erred in law as well on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 37,20,100/- without noticing that the Assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Court, an additional affidavit in compliance of orders of this Court along with the statements of bank accounts, which he states should be taken into consideration by this Court. He contends that the AO had failed to take into account the explanation given regarding the source and ownership of the cash amount recovered during the raid. 11. The learned counsel appearing for the Revenue has drawn this Court s attention to the orders of the learned CIT (A) as well as learned ITAT. We have gone through the orders. The learned CIT (A) as well as the learned ITAT have given similar findings, which have already been set out in the preceding paragraphs. 12. The assessee contends that the finding of the learned ITAT that the source of cash seized during the search operations had not been proved, is perverse. It is contended on behalf of the assessee that the source of cash was duly established by the material placed on record. 13. As noted above, the learned ITAT had rejected the explanation furnished by the assessee that the amounts seized included cash belonging to his mother and his wife on the ground that it was not supported by evidence and withdrawal from bank or other earnings. 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e FY 2014-15; Rs. 2,20,000/- during the FY 2015-16 and Rs. 4,60,000/- during the FY 2016-17. 17. The cash flow statement as set out in the additional affidavit is reproduced below: Mrs. Neelam Sood Cash Flow Statement Financial Year 2012-2013 Particulars Amount Opening Balance as on 1-4-2012 Rs. 27,000/- (+) Cash Withdrawals from Bank Rs. 32,00,000/- (-) Cash deposited in Bank Rs. 9,50,000/- (-) Household Drawings Rs. 2,40,000/- Closing Balance of Cash as on 31-3-2013 Rs. 20,37,000/- Mrs. Neelam Sood Cash Flow Statement Financial Year 2013-2014 Particulars Amount Opening Balance as on 1-4-2013 Rs. 20,37,000/- (+) Cash Withdrawals from Bank Rs. 13,50,000/- (-) Cash deposited in Bank Rs. 10,000/- (-) Household Drawings Rs. 2,40,000/- Closing Balance of Cash as on 31-3-2014 Rs. 31,37,000/- Mrs. Neelam Sood Cash Flow Statement Financial Year 2014-2015 Particulars Amount Opening Balance as on 1-4-2014 Rs. 31,37,000/- (+) Cash Withdrawals from Bank Rs. 1,10,000/- (-) Cash deposited in Bank - (-) Household Drawings Rs. 2,60,000/- Closing Balance of Cash as on 31-3-2015 Rs. 29,87,000/- Mrs. Neelam Sood Cash Flow Statement Financial Year 2015-2016 Particulars Amount Opening Balance as on 1- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
