REVATHI KUMARI SAMINATHAN,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), TPR , TPR

The only effective ground in this appeal of assessee is against confirming the addition on cash deposit of Rs. 28,00,000/- in the bank account in the ex-parte order passed u/s. 144 of the Act.

The brief facts of the case are that the A.O has reopened the assessment on the basis of information that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 28,00,000/- in the saving bank account of SBI and has not filed return of income. The assessee did not file the return and did not responded to the notices and therefore, the A.O has made addition of Rs. 28,00,000/- in the total income. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition as rejecting the assessee’s submission that the source of cash deposit has been agriculture income.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee has argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the cash deposit without considering the cash withdrawal in the bank account. The Ld. AR drawn our attention to the bank statement and to the bank entry that there is sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- deposited on 24.09.2010 by the transfer from her fixed deposit account. The Ld. AR has also brought in our notice that various withdrawal which has not been considered while adding the deposits as unexplained. The Ld. A.R has argued that it is :- 3 -: the responsibility of A.O to compute the correct income and therefore, the matter may be sent back to A.O for determining the correct income.