Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual and employee of Kolkata Port Trust, deposited Rs. 14 lakhs in cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) made an addition to his income, questioning the source of this deposit. The assessee contended that he habitually withdrew cash from his bank and held it in hand, providing balance sheets from March 2015 and March 2016 showing significant cash-in-hand balances.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Upon reviewing the assessee's balance sheets and continuous cash withdrawal patterns from his bank account, the Tribunal found that the assessee had adequate source to explain the Rs. 14,01,000/- cash deposit during demonetization. Consequently, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee had a legitimate and adequately explained source for the cash deposit of Rs. 14 lakhs made during the demonetization period, considering his declared cash in hand and habitual cash withdrawals as reflected in his balance sheets.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-18) Hiranmoy Bhattacherjee Vs ITO, Ward 52(2), Kolkata C/o S.N. Ghosh & Associates, Income Tax office, 169, AJC, Bose Advocates, 2, Garstin Place, 2nd road, Bamboo Villa, Central Floor, Suite No.203, Off hare Street, Revenue Building, Second Floor, Kolkata-700001, West Bengal Kolkata-700014, West Bengal PAN No. :ACYPB 5405 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri Somnath Ghosh, Adv. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 03/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 26.01.2024, passed for the assessment year 2017-18.
Shri Somnath Ghosh, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, ld.Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
The appeal of the assessee is barred by 263 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay which are not found false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, the delay of 263 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.
4. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the assessee is an individual. It was the submission that he and his wife are both employees of Kolkata Port Trust. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer also recognized that the assessee is a government servant for the last 38 years. It was the submission that the assessee does not have any children. It was the submission that the assessee was in habit of withdrawing his salary from the bank account and holding as cash in hand in home. It was the submission that the bank account of the assessee itself shows that the assessee makes continuous cash withdrawals. Ld. AR placed before me the copy of the balance sheet of the assessee as on 31.03.2015 which reads as follows :-
It was the submission that the balance sheet of the assessee as on 31.03.2016 shows cash in hand at Rs.14,53,153/-, which reads as under :-
It was the submission that the bank account of the assessee clearly shows that the assessee continuously withdraws cash and there is no deposit of the same in the bank. It was the submission that the wife of the assessee is also in habit of holding cash in hand in home. It was submitted that during the demonetization period assessee deposited Rs.14 lakhs out of the total amount as shown in the balance sheet as on 31.03.2015. It was submitted that the addition may be deleted insofar as the assessee has no other source of income and the amount deposited in the bank account is only out of his withdrawals from his bank account.
In reply, ld.Sr. DR supported the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that it is impossible for an individual to withdraw his salary and hold the same as cash in hand.