SMT. DINTAKURTHI SHARMILA,MACHILIPATNAM vs. THE ITO, MACHILIPATNAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 25/VIZ/2017Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 February 2018AY 2011-20124 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee failed to provide any evidence to explain the source of the cash deposits, the addition made by the Assessing Officer as income from unexplained sources was justified. The CIT(A) had also rightly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 14,60,132/- in cash into her bank account. She claimed the source to be Shridhanam, gifts, and loans lent out, along with trading in shares and commodities. However, she failed to provide any evidence to substantiate these claims.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the unexplained cash deposits made by the assessee into her bank account and the failure to provide satisfactory evidence for their source.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLESmt. Dintakurthi Sharmila, vs.

For Appellant: Shri C. Subrahmanyam – FCA
For Respondent: Shri P.S. Murthy – Sr.DR
Hearing: 21/02/2018

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada, dated 28/09/2016 for the Assessment Years 2011-12.

2.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee is an individual, filed his return of income in response to the notice issued under section 148 by admitting NIL income. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and after due procedure, assessment is

2 ITA No.25/VIZ/2017 (Smt. Dintakurthi Sharmila)

completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has noted that during the course of verification of bank account statement of SB account No. 1468155000010681 for the Financial Year 2010-11 held in Karur Vysya Bank, Machilipatnam, it is noted that the assessee has made cash deposits on different dates, totalling to Rs. 14,60,132/- When the Assessing Officer questioned about the source of deposits, the assessee has submitted that she had Shridhanam and gifts from her family members around Rs. 3,00,000/- and the same was lent to various persons for interest. She also submitted that she is a B.Sc. (Computers) graduate and is earning Rs.10,000/- p.m. It was further contended that out of the accumulated savings, gifts and loan receipts, she started trading in shares, derivates and commodities though PCS Commodities Ltd. from the year 2009. In this connection, she submitted copies of her trading account with PCS Commodities Ltd. for the year under consideration. Further, during the course of hearing on 12/12/2014, she furnished a revised statement of total income with a claim of set off of loss to the tune of Rs. 10,66,303/-. The Assessing Officer has called and asked the assessee to file the details of the source of cash deposits, but she could not furnish any evidence to show that she had accumulated savings and gifts

3 ITA No.25/VIZ/2017 (Smt. Dintakurthi Sharmila)

received from the family members as Shridhanam. Accordingly, the total cash deposits were worked out to Rs. 14,60,132/-, which has been treated as ‘income from unexplained source’ and added to the total income of the assessee.

3.

On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), assessee neither appeared nor filed any details in respect of source of bank deposits in the SB account maintained with Karur Vysya Bank. Therefore, ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

4.

Before us also, assessee has not filed any details in respect of deposits made in her savings account in Karur Vysya Bank at Machilipatnam Branch. The counsel for the assessee has not able to explain the source of cash deposits. Ld. Departmental Representative has strongly supported the orders passed by the authorities below. 5. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and non-filing of the relevant material to explain the source of cash deposits, we are of the opinion that ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). Thus, this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

4 ITA No.25/VIZ/2017 (Smt. Dintakurthi Sharmila)

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order Pronounced in open Court on this 23rd day of Feb., 2018.

(D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated : 23rd February, 2018. vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee - Smt. Dintakurthi Sharmila, D.NO.4-748, Rajupeta, Machilipatnam, Krishna Dist. 2. The Revenue – ITO, Ward-1, Machilipatnam. 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.

Date Initial Original dictation pad & draft are enclosed in the file 21/02/2018 1. Draft dictated on Sr.PS 22/02/2018 2. Draft placed before author Sr.PS 22/02/2018 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM 22/02/2018 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member JM/AM 22/02/2018 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS /02/2018 6. Date of pronouncement Sr.PS /02/2018 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 9. Date on which file goes to the Sr. Private Secretary 10. Date of dispatch of Order

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →