Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment was reopened under section 147 as large cash deposits were made in her bank accounts. The assessee was asked to explain the source of these deposits, but failed to provide satisfactory explanation. Consequently, the amount was added as deemed income under section 69A.
Held
The Tribunal held that possession of cash in a bank account creates a presumption of ownership. The assessee failed to provide any cogent explanation or evidence to disprove ownership. The various contentions raised by the assessee, including being a victim of an entry operator, were not substantiated.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee is the owner of the cash deposits in her bank account, and if the addition under section 69A for unexplained money is justified when the assessee fails to provide a satisfactory explanation of the source and ownership.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3), 250, 69A, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
order
: March 5th, 2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2012-13 dated 18.06.2024, Dated: 05.03.2025 Bidhan (P.S.)