RAMA SUNIL KERKAR,RADHANAGARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, KOLHAPUR

This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 06.06.2025 for A.Y. 2019-20.

Sole issue for my consideration is regarding the addition of Rs.6,45,781/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69 of the Act for unexplained fixed deposit.

I have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before me. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld. Assessing Officer has made addition for unexplained investment in the form of fixed deposit with Bank of India at Rs.6,45,781/- and the source of this fixed deposit is from the bank transfer received M/s Krishna Rice Mill, Proprietor, Sunil Kerkar, who is the husband of the assessee. He also submitted that the amount received from M/s. Krishna Rice Mill is from the accumulated balance of salary given by Mr. Sunil Kerkar to his wife. On the other hand, Ld. DR stated that the salary expenditure incurred by M/s. Krishna Rice Mill is not genuine and therefore there is no valid source of fund received from M/s. Krishna Rice Mill.

I observe that prior to making of fixed deposit with Bank of India to Rs.6,45,781/-, the assessee received bank transfer from her husband’s sole proprietary concern M/s. Krishan Rice Mill on 01.03.2018 and 13.03.2018 at Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.3,45,781/- respectively. The identity of M/s. Krishna Rice Mill as well as creditworthiness is not in dispute. Genuineness is also proved as the same has been received from assessee’s husband. M/s. Krishna Rice Mill is also assessed to tax and the proprietor Mr. Sunil Kerkar had declared net profit at Rs.8,10,449/- against gross receipts of approx Rs.87.67 lakhs. After going through these details, I am of the considered view that the assessee has successfully explained the nature of source of funds utilized for making the fixed deposit of Rs.6,45,781/- with Bank of India and therefore the impugned addition is uncalled for and is hereby deleted. Finding of Ld.