Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘C’ BENCH,
Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLASHRI N.K. BILLAIYA
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] – Karnal dated 21.12.2016 pertaining to assessment year 2013-14.
The substantive grievances of the assessee read as under:
“That the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law and on facts in allowing part relief to the extent of Rs. 1 lakhs out of total adtional made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 4,50,000/-u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash found during the search.
1.1 That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs. 3,50,000/- is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. “
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that search was conducted at the residential as well as business premises of M/s SRS Group on 09.05.2012. At the time of search operation, an amount of Rs. 16.01 lakhs was found from the residential premises of the assessee. The authorised officer put specific question and the same is as under:
Q. 18On physical search of the residential premises No.535, Sector-14.Faridabad a total cash amounting to Rs. I6,l0.l00/-has been found. Brake up of which is as under:
(i) Cash found from bedroom of Gomati DeviJindal & G.S Jindal Rs. 4,71.900/- (ii) Cash received from Sunil Jindal &Jindal bedroom Rs. 6,33,000/-
(iii) Cash received from Anil Jindal & Mrs. Shashi Jindal bedroom Rs. 3,83,900/-
(iv) Cash received from Vinod Jindal & Mrs.Ritu Jindal bedroom Rs.1,21,300/-
Please consult all the above family members and explain the sources of this cash. Ans. We withdraw Rs. 40,000/- each member(4 members) per month for house hold expenses and this amount is the accumulation of saving from household expenses.
Q. 19 Please give me the break up of monthly expenditure incurred by all your family members?
Rs. 7,500/- on milk Rs. 10,000/- on vegetables Rs. 15,000/- on grocery Rs. 5,000/- on servant salary Rs, 15,000/- on petrol Rs, 5,000/- on miscellaneous exp. Rs. 5,000/- on medicines Rs. 10,000/- on clothes
Total Rs.72,000/- +500/- i) Q.2 Please provide the documentary evidence in support residence? ii) Arts. Right now, 1 do not have any evidence. I will provide later on..”
During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the assessee was once again asked to explain the source of cash in hand.
The assessee furnished details of cash of each family member and the source thereof as under:
Name Cash Source of Amount Dated Supporting found in Cash No 1 Anil Jindal 175.966 Bank 20.04.1 2 Copy of Cash With Statement/ 200,000 drawal Bank Statement 2 Sunil Jindal 76.953 Bank 20.04.12 Copy of Cash With Statement-' 100.000 drawal Bank Statement
3. Vmod Jindal 93533 Bank 20.04 12 Copy of Cash 100000 With Statement/ Bank drawal L ... ..... Statement ...................... 4. 1,00,000 G.S Jindal 176069 Bank 20.04.12 Copy of Cash With Statements drawal Bank Statement 5 Bank 200.000 29 02.12 Copy of Cash With Statement/ _ drawal Bank Statement . ^ Shashi 79214 Bank 29.02. 2 Capy of Cash 200.000 Jin da! With Statement- drawal Bank 6 Statement 7 1,50,000 20.0412 Rilu Jindal 220589 Bank Copy of Cash With Statement - drawal Bank Statement Bank 100000 29.02.12 Copy of Cash With Statement/ Drawal Bank Statement 7 Shalini 185498 Bank 200,000 20.04.12 Copy of Cash State mend Jindal With Bank drawal Statement Anil Jindal 169887 Rental 1,60.888 Copy of cash Income (HUF) 8. book/ITR/ Computation of income 9 Prateek 4000 Savings Jindal 10 Gomiti Devi 428391 Savings
5. The Assessing Officer did not accept the details furnished by the assessee and was of the opinion that whatever submissions given by the assessee is nothing but an afterthought, and cannot be accepted and accordingly, out of total cash of Rs. 4,71,900/-, found from the bed room of Shri G.S. Jindal, addition of Rs. 4,50,000/- was made.
The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) and contended that the assessee is 70 years old and his wife Smt. Gomati Devi is 69 years old and most of the cash belonged to his wife who has also submitted that Rs. 4,28,391/- was Stridhan that accumulated over 20-25 years. It was further brought to the notice of the ld. CIT(A) that there were cash withdrawals of Rs. 2 lakhs on 29.02.2012 and Rs. 1 lakh on 20.04.2012 and the same covers cash in hand.
After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that the total Stridhan of the wife of the assessee, as claimed, cannot be accepted. However, explanation was accepted to the extent of Rs. 1 lakhs on account of Stridhan and addition of Rs. 3,50,000/- was sustained.
Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities.
Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer.
We have given thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed facts are that during the course of search proceedings itself, the assessee has explained the break-up of cash in the name of his family members. Such break-up is exhibited elsewhere. The undisputed fact is that cash was found from the bedroom of the appellant and, therefore, it can be safely presumed that it was in joint possession of the assessee and his wife Smt. Gomati Devi. The possession of cash as Stridhan by Smt. Gomati Devi cannot be ruled out in the light of the customs prevailing in the society.
Moreover, the first appellate authority completely ignored the fact that there were cash withdrawals from the banks on two occasions amounting to Rs. 3 lakhs. Added to this, Stridhan of Smt. Gomati Devi at Rs. 4,28,391/- would suffice to explain the cash of Rs. 4,71,000/- Considering the afore-stated facts in totality, we do not find any merit in the additions made by the Assessing Officer. We, accordingly, direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned additions.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is allowed.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 31.12.2019.