DIPAK KUMAR MAJUMDER,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), DURGAPUR

After considering the submissions of the assessee, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee saying that there is no supporting document or evidence in support of cash deposit.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised the following issues:- (1) For that on the facts of the case, the Ld. C1T(A) has passed on 02.02.2024 which is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. (2) For that on the facts of the case, the Ld. C.I.T.(A) was wrong in not considering the merit of the case, therefore, the order passed by the Ld. C.I.T.(A) is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. (3) For that on the facts of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was wrong in dittoing the order of the A.O. and not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,00,000/- on account of cash deposited in bank during the demonetization period (A.Y. 2017-2018) Dipak Kumar Majumdar treating the same as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the LT. Act. (4) For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the assessee had discharged its onus by furnishing all the relevant documents in connection with the source of fund, and withdrawal made immediately for the purpose of daughter’s marriage, therefore, the A.O. may be directed to delete the addition amounting to Rs.14,00,000/- made u/s. 69A of the LT. Act. (5) For that on the facts of the case, the A.O. was wrong in applying section 115BBE which is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. (6) For that the charging interest u/s. 234A at Rs.10,992/-, u/s. 234B at Rs.3,62,736/- and u/s. 234C at Rs.888/- is completely arbitrary, unjustified and illegal. (7) For that the appellant reserves the right to adduce any further ground or grounds, if necessary, at or before the hearing of the appeal.

I have heard both the sides. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee is a senior citizen and for the purpose of marriage expenses of his daughter, she sold her cars/vehicles and invoices also placed before the revenue authorities but without examining any of the documents/evidences filed by the assessee, ld. Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.14,00,000/- which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). He, therefore, pleaded to delete the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer.

On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that since the assessee has not clearly established the source for cash deposit, therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer rightly made the addition and the same was confirmed by the ld.

I have perused the relevant documents filed by the assessee by way of paper book. The only contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the assessee sold his cars to meet the marriage expenditure of his daughter and to establish the sales, the assessee also filed the invoices on different dates, which clearly establishes that the assessee received sale consideration by selling his cars. Apart from this, the assessee also filed the wedding invitation of the marriage of his daughter, which is placed at pages 11 & 12 of the paper book. On perusal of the said documents, it is clear that the assessee has performed the marriage of his daughter and for the purpose of marriage, he sold the cars and deposited the sale consideration in the Bank and withdrew the money from the Bank to meet the marriage expenses of his daughter. He also filed the Bank Statement in his paper book.

The issue involved in Ground No. 6 relating to charging of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C is consequential in nature and the Assessing Officer is

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17/03/2025.