Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2025 (1) TMI 805

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assessee to make the deposits from 28.10.2010 to 15.03.2011. Therefore, the assessee has established the source of cash with him. Accordingly, we are inclined to allow the grounds raised by the assessee. - Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate, Shri Shrey Jain, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR ORDER The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [ Ld. CIT(A) , for short]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 21.02.2024 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Brief facts of the case are, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) by issue of notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Income-tax Rules, 1962 as in relation to cash deposit of Rs. 17.82 lacs, there is cash withdrawal of Rs. 20 lacs during the year. After considering the submissions of the assessee, ld. CIT (A) after analysing the information submitted by the assessee partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and sustained the addition under section 69A of the Act to the extent of Rs. 14,57,996/- and proceeded to sustain the addition by adopting peak credit. 4. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee is in appeal before me by raising following grounds of appeal :- 1. That the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is arbitrary, illegal and against the fact. 2. The order passed by the ld. CIT is void ab-initio as no notice under section 148 is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it is submitted that during the AY 2011-12 assessee had withdrawn cash amounting to Rs. 20,00,000/- and deposited cash of Rs. 17,82,000/- in his account maintained with Punjab National Bank, Prem Nagar, Kamal (PB 5-7) detail of which is as follows:- Date of withdrawal Withdrawal Deposits Date of deposit 10,000.00 31-May-10 5,000.00 18-Jun-10 1,000.00 21-Jun-10 5-Oct-10 100,000.00 200,000.00 28-Oct-10 6-Oct-10 500,000.00 150,000.00 29-Oct-10 7-Oct-10 100,000.00 15,000.00 29-Oct-10 8-Oct-10 600,000.00 100,000.00 8-Nov-10 20-Oct-10 200,000.00 49,000.00 9-Nov-10 21-Oct-10 100,000.00 49,000.00 10-Nov-10 25-Oct-10 300,000.00 49,000.00 11-Nov-10 27-Oct-10 100,000.00 49,000.00 12-Nov-10 100,000.00 13-Nov-10 220,000.00 15-Nov-10 49,000.00 3-Dec-10 4 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ld. AO could not have been made and since may please be deleted. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is based on only one adverse observation which is met as under: 1. At para 5.3.2, page 9 of the appeal order, Ld. CIT(A) has alleged that cash withdrawal started on 05.10.2010 on which date there was a transfer of amount of Rs. 13,64,000/- into the appellant's bank account which resulted in peak credit of Rs. 14,57,996/- for the appellant. This credit entry that resulted in the balance from which the chain of deposits and withdrawals started is not explained. In this regard it is respectfully submitted that assessee has explained the source of cash which are being withdrawn from the bank as mentioned at PB 3-4 of written submission and he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the assessee has withdrawn cash from 05.10.2010 to 27.10.2010 which is withdrawal of Rs. 20 lakh during this period and the same was redeposited on 28.10.2010 and in subsequent dates. He submitted that cash deposits are out of cash withdrawals. In this regard, I observed the case of ACIT vs. Baldev Raj Charla Ors. (2009) 121 TTJ 0366 wherein it was held as under :- 27. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record and have gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that this explanation of the assessee was found correct that against these five deposits on dt. 14th June, 1996, Rs. 31,000; 21st July, 1997, Rs. 1,27,000; 18th Sept., 1997, Rs. 22,000; 4th Oct., 1997, Rs. 26,000 and on 7th N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates