9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for the years 2010-11, 2011-12 2015-16 only. The bank statements show that assessee conducted activities beyond assessment year 2015-16 but had not filed any ITR. The assessee has not offered income arising out of his activities for taxation. Be that as it may, in view of facts and circumstances of the case, to balance equity and to meet the ends of justice, we hold that source of cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- as unexplained and remaining cash deposits to be out of explained source. Assessee had transferred Rs. 10,00,000/- each vide entries dated 11.05.2013 14.05.2013 to Harbans Lal Gulati who had returned Rs. 20,00,000/- vide bank entry dated 19.01.2017 in South Indian Bank, Janakpuri stand fully explained. The deposits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 142(1) of the Act. On basis of data/information gathered under Operation Clean Money , the Income Tax Department gathered a list of assessees who has deposited substantial cash in the bank accounts during the period of demonetization i.e. 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 but had not filed Income Tax Return for A.Y. 2017-18. Shri Vinod Sharma - assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 37,16,000/- in Bank A/c No.0359053000006858 maintained with South Indian Bank, Janakpuri during the period of demonetization. The assessee had neither filed Income Tax Return under section 139 or in response to notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Show-cause notice was issued on 13.09.2019. The assessee instead of filing reply sought another opportunity vide e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... netization Cash from Mother 3,77,100/- Mother Various dates Cash from Brother Mr. Mohit Sharma 4,65,600/- Brother Past Savings 9,66,566/- Self Total 47,53,965/- 6. Learned Authorized Representative for the assessee/appellant submitted that learned CIT(A) erred in upholding addition of Rs. 23,26,003/- under section 69A of the Act, being aggregate of credit entries except cash deposited appearing in the bank accounts of the appellant. Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that vide bank entries dated 11.05.2013 and 14.05.2013, Rs. 10,00,000/- each were given to Harbans Lal Gulati which were returned by Harbans Lal Gulati vide credit entry of Rs. 20,00,000/- dated 19.01.2017. Assessee had received various sums vide bank credit entries from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant/assessee had transferred Rs. 10,00,000/- each vide entries dated 11.05.2013 14.05.2013 to Harbans Lal Gulati who had returned Rs. 20,00,000/- vide bank entry dated 19.01.2017 in South Indian Bank, Janakpuri stand fully explained. The deposits in bank thus represents repayment of earlier payment to Gulati. Appellant/assessee has claimed that his family members vide various bank credit entries had transferred Rs. 2,63,600/- (i.e. Rs. 2,09,600/- from his mother, Rs. 27,000/- from his wife, Rs. 17,000/- from his brother and Rs. 10,000/- from his father). As such, the additions of Rs. 23,26,003/- under section 69A is unsustainable and is deleted. In view of above, ground no. 1 is partly allowed and ground no. 2 is allowed. 10. In the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
