ISAKSAB MOHMADGAUSHSAB MULLA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-28(1) (4), MUMBAI , MUMBAI

Grounds of appeal read as under:-

Brief facts of the case are that addition in this case was made by the AO on account of cash deposits in assessee’s bank account, in an ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the I.T.Act. Before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee gave details that the cash which was deposited was withdrawn from the bank of the assessee itself during the same financial year. However, the Ld.CIT(A) rejected the same. He held that assessee has not given any cogent reason for cash withdrawal and subsequent cash deposits in same bank. Hence, he dismissed the assessees appeal.

Against the above order, assessee is in appeal before the ITAT.

I have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. From the submissions in the grounds of appeal and the facts on record. I note that the cash were withdrawn during the same financial year from the same bank before the deposit in the same bank. It is not the case of the revenue that revenue has detected any application of the cash withdrawal in any other manner. It is also not the case that the deposit is not commensurate with the withdrawal. Hence, why this plea of the assessee of having deposit the same cash, which was withdrawn from the bank in the same account cannot be accepted is not evident from the orders of the authorities below. Addition based on whims and fancies are not sustainable. There is no law that if a person withdraws cash from his own bank and subsequently deposits the same in the bank account, there would be adverse inference against the assessee. Hence, I set aside the orders of the authorities below and direct that addition be deleted.

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed.