SMT. BASKAR GAJALAKSHMI PRABHA,MADURAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION CIRCLE, MADURAI

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai in dated 28.07.2022. The assessment order was framed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle, Madurai, for the assessment year

The only issue in this appeal is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming action of the AO in making addition to the extent of Rs.24,92,060/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. For this assessee has raised various grounds which are argumentative, exhaustive and hence, need not be reproduced.

Brief facts are that the assessee is a non-resident individual and filed her return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 04.11.2017. The AO noted that the assessee has made cash deposit in Indian Bank A/c No.408480700 and required her to explain the source of deposit. The assessee has made deposit from 31.05.2016 to 30.03.2017 in aggregate to Rs.51,59,500/-. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings noted that the assessee out of above cash deposit of Rs.51,59,500/- could not explain the cash deposit amounting to Rs.30,25,560/- and hence, added the same to the total income of the assessee as ‘unexplained money’ u/s.69A of the Act. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A).

The CIT(A) further allowed and treated the money as explained to the extent of Rs.5,34,500/- and balance, he confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs.24,92,060/- by observing in para 5.3 as under:- 5.3 I have considered the matter. The assessee deposited Rs.5,10,000/- in cash on 31.05.2016. Assessee claimed to have opening cash balance of Rs.5,52,652 as on 31.03.2016. There was no cash withdrawal during the year before the date deposit. The opening cash balance shown by assessee does not have any authentic proof. If there was opening cash at all, it is also not understood as to why assessee should deposit nearly all her cash holding in bank account on a particular date. Therefore, the source of cash deposited cannot be taken as explained. Regarding the sum of Rs.36,25,000/- deposited on 02.06.2016, the AO had accepted the source to the extent of Rs.16,89,000/- because on the date of deposit, assessee's mother had received Rs.16,89,000/- on account of sale of property. During the course of the year, assessee had shown cash withdrawal of only Rs. 1,25,000/- before 02.06.2016. Therefore, the source of cash (Rs.36,25,000- 16,89,000) or Rs. 19,36,000/- is not at all explained. There was another deposit of Rs.4,90,000/- on 14.07.2016. Even that deposit is not matched by corresponding cash withdrawals prior to that date during the course of the year. Hence, the deposit of Rs.4,90,000/- also cannot be treated as explained. Assessee claimed that interest received on FD formed part of source of cash deposited. This explanation is not acceptable in absence of withdrawals of cash from bank. Assessee also claimed to have received interest of Rs.4,95,780/- from outsiders. This contention is also without any proof in the form .of confirmation from the so called 'outsiders'. Regarding residual cash deposit of Rs.5,34,500/-, it is seen that deposits were preceded by sufficient cash withdrawals. The AO had already given benefit on account of assessee's sale of land, rent received as well as agriculture income. Therefore, I am of the view that deposit to the extent of Rs.5,34,500/- can be treated as being sourced from withdrawals. Hence, assessee gets relief of Rs.5,34,500/-. Addition of Rs.24,92,060/- (Rs.30,26,560-5,34,500) is confirmed. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before Tribunal.

The ld.counsel for the assessee before us submitted that the assessee has submitted cash book vide submissions dated 14.07.2022 and in the said cash book, there were entries showing the receipts and loans by assessee from various parties for purchase of two pieces of land from one Mrs. Saraswathy Ammal on 23.05.2016. The ld. Counsel explained that the amounts received in cash are recorded in assessee’s cash book and since the assessee had to make payment in three parts, cash was deposited into her bank account. Thereafter the amounts were repaid to the creditors through cheques. The assessee explained by filing details before us that total loans taken is amounting to Rs.19,58,200/-, which is as under:

On the other hand, the ld.Senior DR relied on the assessment order and that of the CIT(A).

We have heard rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the CIT(A) sustained the following cash deposits:-

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.