GURBACHAN LAL,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(3), FARIDABAD

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

Coming to the sole substantive issue between the parties regarding correctness of both the lower authorities’ action treating the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.14,58,000/- as unexplained to the extent of Rs.4,00,000/- only, in the course of assessment framed on 25.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. The CIT(A)/NFAC appears to have adjudicated the same as follows: Gurbanchan Lal 2 “5.2 The addition made by the Assessing Officer and the submissions of the appellant have been examined. It is seen that the appellant claimed withdrawal of Rs.9,50,000/- as on 10.06.2010 as the amount available as on 01.04.2022 is not justifiable, as the appellant kept on withdrawing amount of Rs.3,50,000/- even subsequently and out of which Rs.2,00,000/- has been deposited back leaving balance out of the Rs.11,00,000/- and claiming Rs.6,58,000/- as opening balance. The appellant did not explain as to why such huge cash was withdrawn and the purpose for which it is drawn. In view of the long gap the claim is not acceptable. Therefore, the order of the AO is sustained and the grounds raised in this regard are dismissed.

3 With regard to re-opening of the assessment u/s 147 of the Act, the AO has obtained approval from the Pr. CIT, Faridabad, which has been mentioned in the assessment order. It is also seen that the appellant has not raised the issue of re-opening and the reasons for such re-opening before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. The primary onus lies on the appellant to explain the cash deposits made in the bank account. Since, the appellant failed to explain the cash deposits, the AO has rightly passed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. As such, the contention of the appellant that the re-opening is bad in law is rejected.”

Suffice to say, it is already come on record that not only the assessee has withdrawn Rs.9,50,000/- on 10.06.2010 which followed subsequent withdrawal but also the learned lower authorities have simply brushed aside his submissions of having opening cash of Rs.6,58,000/- going by the cash flow statement, without substantiating the impugned addition. That being the case, I find no merit in the learned lower authorities’ action treating the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.5,00,000/- as unexplained which is directed to be deleted. Gurbanchan Lal 3 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 02/06/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)