SANTOSH KUMAR SAHU,ANGUL vs. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 232/CTK/2019Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 December 2019AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficiently explained deposits totaling Rs. 4,04,766/- through bank statements showing maturity of recurring deposits of his wife and son, and a withdrawal followed by a deposit. However, the deposit of Rs. 50,000/- remained unexplained.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer added Rs. 4,84,016/- to the assessee's income on account of unexplained deposits in bank accounts, as the deposits exceeded the declared gross receipts. The assessee provided explanations for some of these deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee provided sufficient explanation for the cash deposits in his bank accounts, and if not, whether the addition made by the AO was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG

For Appellant: Shri A.Acharya, AR
For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Hearing: 13/11

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of

the CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar dated 15.4.2019 for the assessment

year 2015-16.

2.

The sole ground taken in this appeal is that the CIT(A) was

not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.4,84,016/- on

account of deposit in the bank account of the assessee.

3.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Assessing

Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, found that

the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs.23,74,266/- in two

P a g e 1 | 4 bank accounts, whereas the gross receipts shown by the assessee

during the year were Rs.18,90,250/-. Therefore, the Assessing

officer made addition of Rs.4,84,016/- treating the excess deposit

in two bank accounts of the assessee with Orissa Gramya bank

Account No.XXXX604 u/s 69A of the Act.

4.

On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition.

5.

Before me, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted copies of

recurring bank statements of his wife Mrs Dali Sahu vide A./c

No.XXXX400 and his son Master Rajesh A/c No.XXXX 399, wherein

on 21.1.2015, amount of Rs.1,02,461/- each totaling to

Rs.2,04,766/- has been shown as maturity amount credited in

assessee’s bank account No.604 and the same has been explained

by the assessee by way of this account.

6.

Ld Departmental Representative could not controvert these

factual position that the amount of maturity of recurring deposit

kept in the name of the wife and son of the assessee has been

credited to the assessee’s bank account.

7.

Another grievance as noted by the Assessing Officer was

that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.2,00,000/- on

6.8.2014 and Rs.50,000/- on 21.1.2015 to his bank account with

Uco Bank, Talmul Sasan Angul A/c No.XXXX213. The explanation

P a g e 2 | 4 of the assessee is that he withdrew Rs.2,20,000/- on 5.8.2014

from Uco Bank account No.604 and out of that amount

Rs.2,00,000/- was deposited on next date i.e. on 6.8.2014 to the

Uco Bank Account. From the copies of bank statement of the

assessee, I am satisfied about the explanation of the assessee

regarding the deposit of Rs.2 lakhs to his bank account.

8.

So far as deposit of Rs.50,000/- on 21.1.2015 is concerned,

I am unable to see any entry in its bank account, which could

justify this amount of Rs.50,000/- deposited on 21.1.2015. It was

the contention of the assessee before the authorities below that

the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- was refund of loan but I am unable

to see any evidence regarding the said debtor who returned the

loan amount to the assessee and the same was deposited in cash

to the bank account of the assessee.

9.

In view of foregoing discussion, I reached to a logical

conclusion that the assessee explained amount of Rs.4,04,766/-

by way of cogent and tangible documentary evidence in the form

of bank statement which clearly reveals that amount of maturity

was deposited to the bank account of the assessee, which was

received by his wife and son and the assessee withdrew

Rs.2,20,000/- immediately one day after the deposit amount of

P a g e 3 | 4 Rs.2,00,000/- was deposited to the bank account of the assessee

i.e. on 6.8.2014. I am unable to agree with the contention of the

assessee regarding cash deposit of Rs.50,000/- on 21.1.2015.

Resultantly, the assessee gets relief of Rs.4,04,766/-. The AO is

directed to delete Rs.4,04,766/- as duly explained by the assessee

the source of deposit and balance amount of Rs.79,250/- is

confirmed.

10.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed.

Order pronounced on 4 /12/2019.

Sd/- (Chandra Mohan Garg) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 4 /12/2019 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Santosh Kumar Sahu, Talmul, Via: Banarpal, Angul.

2.

The Respondent.: ITO, Angul Ward, Kulad, Angul 3. The CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT- 2, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

By order

Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 4 | 4

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →