PRAMILA DEVI,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The grievance of the assessee is two-fold – first challenge is in respect of service of notice u/s 148 and 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'The Act'] and second challenge is in respect of additions made on account of cash found to be deposited in the Savings Bank account.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that he is not pressing the ground relating to the service of notice u/s 148 and 143(2) of the Act.

Coming to the merits of the case, return of income for the year under consideration was selected for scrutiny assessment. The return was selected on the basis of information received wherein it was reported that the assessee was maintaining a bank account with the Central Bank of India, Branch at Lawrence Road, Delhi wherein total cash deposits of Rs. 35.11 lakhs on different dates were found. The assessee was asked to explain the same.

On receiving no plausible reply, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 35.11 lakhs.

The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success.

Before me the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that firstly, the cash found to be deposited in the said Savings Bank Account is not Rs. 35.11 lakhs but only Rs. 30 lakhs. The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the said bank account is jointly operated by the assessee and her husband Shri Vinod Kumar. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that for any cash found to be deposited, the source should have been asked from the spouse of the assessee.

The ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer.

I have given careful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute that Rs. 30 lakhs was deposited on 2.6.2009, six times Rs. 5 lakhs each. A perusal of the bank statement clearly shows the PAN of the person who has deposited the cash. PAN of the assessee is not PAN of the person who has deposited cash. The Assessing Officer should have made enquiry from the person whose PAN is mentioned in the bank statement, which is placed at page 40 of the paper book. Since the bank account is in joint name, entire addition cannot be made in the hands of the assessee only when the PAN details of cash depositor is mentioned in the bank statement itself.

In the interest of justice and fair play, I restore the entire assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to call for details from the person whose PAN is mentioned in the bank statement and take necessary action as per law after giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I order accordingly.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.