Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 359/VIZ/2017 (Asst. Year : 2010-11) Ms. Pallem Nisamthi, vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), 41-1/5-1A, Gowthami Nagar, Vijayawada. Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada PAN No. ATQPP 2614 L (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri C. Subrahmanyam, FCA. Department By : Shri K.C. Das, Sr.DR
Date of hearing : 20/07/2018. Date of pronouncement : 10/08/2018.
O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Visakhapatnam, dated 28/02/2017 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The only ground pressed by the assessee is with regard to withdrawal amount of Rs. 4,55,000/- from the bank account for the F.Y. 2009-10. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that assessee is an individual carrying on share trading business, no return of income has been
2 ITA No.359/VIZ/2017 (Pallem Nisamthi)
filed. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act. In pursuance to that, assessee has filed a return of income by declaring loss of Rs. 7,19,730/-. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has noted that the assessee has deposited Rs.3,88,000/- and Rs. 1,12,000/- on 06/11/2009. When the Assessing Officer has asked, the assessee explained that she has withdrawn cash of Rs. 4,55,000/- on 19/09/2009 and the same is deposited again in her bank account. The Assessing Officer has not accepted the explanation given by the assessee and the same is treated as unexplained cash credits and added to the total income of the assessee under the head ‘income from other sources’. 4. On appeal, ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee has withdrawn an amount of Rs. 4,55,000/- from her bank account on 19/09/2009 and the bank balance as on 30/09/2009 was Rs.41,231/-. The assessee had made further cash withdrawal of Rs. 40.00 lakhs on 07/10/2009. This withdrawal itself shows that earlier withdrawal was utilized by the assessee for some other purpose. The cash deposits made again on 06/11/2009 of Rs.4,55,000/- (Rs. 3,88,000 + Rs. 1,12,000), which is not supported by any evidence and accordingly he confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.
3 ITA No.359/VIZ/2017 (Pallem Nisamthi)
On appeal before us, ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that assessee has withdrawn an amount Rs.4,55,000/- on 19/09/2009 and the same is deposited on 06/11/2009, therefore, the amount deposited by the assessee cannot be treated as unexplained cash credit credits, hence, the same has to be deleted. 6. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative strongly supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have heard both the sides, perused the material available on record and the orders of the authorities below. 8. In this case, the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs.3,88,000/- and Rs. 1,12,000/- on 06/11/2009. When the Assessing Officer has asked the assessee what is the source of deposit, it is submitted that she has withdrawn Rs. 4,55,000/- from her bank account on 19/09/2009, the same is deposited again. The assessee has not filed any corroborative evidence and also not explained what is the purpose of withdrawal and why the same is deposited in the bank account on the same day in different amounts. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has not believed the explanation of the assessee that the amount deposited on 06/11/2009 is the amount withdrawn on
4 ITA No.359/VIZ/2017 (Pallem Nisamthi)
19/11/2009. On appeal, ld. CIT(A) has observed that subsequent to the withdrawal of Rs. 4,55,000/- on 19/09/2009, the assessee has also withdrawn an amount of Rs. 40.00 lakhs on 07/07/2009. Therefore, the assessee has utilised the amount of Rs. 4,55,000/- and after utilising the above amount, again she withdrawn Rs.40.00 lakhs therefore, the deposits made by the assessee again on 06/11/2009 cannot be considered the same amount as withdrawn on 19/09/2009 deposited. Before us, assessee is not explained what is the purpose of withdrawal and again deposited the same on 06/11/2009 in two differential amounts i.e. Rs. 3,88,000/- & Rs. 1,12,000/-. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the amount deposited on 06/11/2009 cannot be considered the same amount she was withdrawn on 19/09/2009. In view of the above, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this ground of appeal raised by the assessee is dismissed. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 10th day of August, 2018.
Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 10th August, 2018.
5 ITA No.359/VIZ/2017 (Pallem Nisamthi)
vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – Ms. Pallem Nisamthi, 41-1/5-1A, Gowthami Nagar, Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada. 2. The Revenue – ITO, Ward-2(2), Vijayawada. 3. The Pr.CIT, Vijayawada. 4. The CIT(A), Vijayawada. 5. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 6. Guard file. By order
(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.