BHAULA BALWANTRAO TATHE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(7), PUNE, PUNE

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.14,42,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.69A of the Act towards cash deposit in bank accounts.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee retired from Maharashtra State Electricity Board on 31-08-2003, where he was working as an Establishment Officer. During the demonetization period relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee made certain cash deposits totaling to Rs.14,42,000/- in six accounts maintained in banks and cooperative societies. On being called upon to explain the source of deposit, the assessee submitted the same to be arising from his retirement benefits. Not convinced, the AO refused to accept the same because there was a difference of approximately thirteen years in the receipt of retirement benefits and the alleged deposits in the bank account. In the first appeal, the assessee remained absent, which led to the passing of the ex parte order.

I have heard the ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of assessee despite notice. I am, therefore, proceeding to dispose of the appeal on merits ex parte qua the assessee.

Admittedly, the assessee deposited cash of Rs.14,42,000/- in his bank account in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. However, the source of the same was not properly explained. The assessee retired more than a decade ago.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.