No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.10.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patiala [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].
The sole dispute raised in this appeal relates to the addition of Rs. 18.43 lacs made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained
cash deposits which was found deposited in the account of the assessee. The Assessing Officer treated the said deposit as ‘unexplained income’ of the assessee.
ITA No. 1596-Chd-2018- Sh. Nirmal Singh, Patiala 2 3. In appeal before the CIT(A), it was explained that, in fact, the
said amount was deposited by the assessee in his account after receiving
the same from one Shri Rajinder Singh. The assessee further explained
that, in fact, the assessee intended to send his son to Australia on
study Visa, for which the assessee had to show his creditworthiness for
which the temporary deposits were made in the bank account after
arranging the same from Shri Rajinder Singh, who is a private financer.
The assessee took the help of Shri Munish Kumar and Vinod Kumar who
introduced the assessee to Shri Rajidner Singh. The assessee in this
respect filed the factual evidence in the shape of affidavits of the
concerned persons and also bank account statements of Shri Rajinder
Singh to prove the withdrawals of the said amount from his account
which was further deposited in the assessee’s account. The Ld. CIT(A)
called for the remand report from the Assessing Officer in this respect, Shri Rajinder Singh appeared before the Assessing Officer and confirmed that he had given the aforesaid amount to the assessee after
withdrawing the same from his bank account which was further
deposited by the assessee in his saving account. He also confirmed that
he was introduced to the assessee by Shri Munish Kumar and Shri Viond
Kumar. The Ld. CIT(A), however, confirmed the additions made by the
Assessing Officer on the ground that one of the middleman Shri Vinod
Kumar did not accept the summons and even told the concerned
Inspector, who had gone there to deliver the summons, that he had
nothing to do with the aforesaid transaction.
ITA No. 1596-Chd-2018- Sh. Nirmal Singh, Patiala 3 4. I have heard the rival contentions and have also gone through the
record. In this case, the concerned person namely Shri Rajinder Singh
has personally appeared and confirmed that he had paid the amount of
Rs. 18.43 lacs to the assessee. He has also confirmed / proved the
aforesaid fact by producing the bank account statement. Further, the
amount was paid back to him by the assessee after withdrawing the
same from his bank account after a short span of time. The assessee has
also explained the reasons for getting the said short term loan which
seems to be plausible. Merely because Shri Vinod Kumar has not turned
up, may be because of his own certain apprehensions, however, the
assessee, in my view, has been able to prove the source of deposits as
well as reason for the deposits and under the circumstances it does not
appear to be the unaccounted income of the assessee.
In view of this, I do not find any justification on the part of the
lower authorities in making the impugned addition and the same is
accordingly ordered to be deleted.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
Order dictated and pronounced in the Open Court immediately on
completion of hearing
Sd/-
(संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 10.06.2019 “आर.के.”
ITA No. 1596-Chd-2018- Sh. Nirmal Singh, Patiala 4 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar