Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 against the CIT(A) order involved proceedings under Section 143(3). The assessee received a loan of Rs. 1 crore from Shri Than Singh, which was deposited in his bank account. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 68, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Held
The tribunal noted that the deposit in question involved a withdrawal of Rs. 70 lacs by Smt. Bhagwanti Devi from a joint account which had received sale consideration. Therefore, the addition to that extent could not be sustained, but the remaining Rs. 30 lacs addition was confirmed. Another addition of Rs. 15 lacs was also confirmed as the assessee failed to discharge the onus of proving genuineness.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of unexplained cash credits of Rs. 1 crore under Section 68 was justified, and whether the addition of Rs. 15 lacs was rightly confirmed.
Sections Cited
143(3), 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14 arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the “CIT(A)”] Gwalior order dated 31.01.2019, involving proceedings under Section143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’
Case called twice. None appeared at the assessee behest. It is accordingly proceeded exparte.
Brajesh Sharma 2. The revenue vehemently argued during the course of hearing that both ld. lower authorities have rightly made addition of unexplained cash credits of Rs.1 crores with respect to Shri Than Singh and another addition of Rs.10 lac relating to Shri Ajay Upashyay and Rs.5 lac to Shri Ram Kumar Gupta; respectively, in the course of assessment framed on 30.03.2016 as upheld by the CIT(A) in the lower appellate discussion.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and the Revenue’s forgoing submissions. Upon perusal of the assessment discussion at page 2 of the assessment order, it could be seen that the assessee had received loan of Rs.1 crores from Shri Than Singh whose bank joint account with Smt. Bhagwanti Bai, had seen credited with sale consideration of Rs.1.30 crores followed by withdraws to the extent of Rs.70 lacs. And that as amount of Rs.1 crores was deposited in the said sole account for advancing to the assessee. Learned Assessing Officer did not accept the explanation of the assessee and added the same u/s 68. Upon being confirmed by Learned CIT(A) the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The position that emerges in this that such deposit is that Smt. Bhagwanti Devi had withdrawn the amount of Rs.70 Lacs which has been deposited in the bank account. Therefore, the addition, to the extent, could not be sustained. The remaining addition of Rs.30 lacs stand confirmed in these facts.
The remaining addition of Rs. 15 lacs (supra) also deserves to be confirmed since the assessee has not discharged the onus of establishing genuineness and creditworthiness thereof. Necessary computations shall follow as per law.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.02.2025