MRS. DIVYA ANUND,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP. WARD 1(2), CHENNAI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A(SMC
Before: SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER MANJUNATHA. G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 06.09.2023 and pertains to assessment year 2017-18.
:-2-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed her return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 20.03.2018, admitting a taxable income of Rs. 2,91,140/-. The case was selected for scrutiny to verify cash deposits during demonetization period. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has made huge cash deposits in various bank account in old currency amounting to Rs. 35,03,500/-, which includes a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- cash deposit into her minor son bank account maintained with AXIS bank. The Assessing Officer, called upon the assessee to explain source for cash deposits. The assessee vide letter dated 27.11.2017 submitted that,assessee received sum of Rs. 16,00,000/- against bounced cheques from Mr. Saleem Ahmed during demonetization period, which was deposited into ICICI savings bank account. She, further submitted that balance amount of Rs. 19,03,500/- has been deposited out of cash in hand accumulated over the period of time, by withdrawal from savings bank account for past 2½ years and source for cash withdrawal from bank account is out of amount transferred by her husband who works in Kuwait. The Assessing Officer, however was not satisfied with explanation furnished by the
:-3-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 assessee and according to the Assessing Officer, although the assessee claims to have received cash in view of bouncedcheques from Mr. Saleem Ahmed, but no documentary evidence has been filed. Further, no details has been filed to prove receipt of money from her husband’s account and also accumulation of cash in hand out of withdrawal from same bank account during last 2½ years. Therefore, rejected arguments of the assessee and made additions of Rs. 35,03,500/- u/. 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority and the ld. CIT(A) sustained additions made towards cash deposits u/s. 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Aggrieved by the ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, submitted that the assessee has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 45,85,700/-, over a period of four years starting from financial year 2014-15 to financial year 2016-17, from her savings bank account and such withdrawal is out of amount transferred by her husband, who works in Kuwait. The assessee further submitted that, she has submitted all details including cash in hand available
:-4-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 as on the date of demonetization and also income proof from her husband to prove cash withdrawal from bank account. The Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A), without appreciating relevant facts simply sustained additions made by the Assessing Officer.
The ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the assessee could not submit any details in support of amount claimed to have been received from Mr. Saleem Ahmed, in view of bouncedcheques. The assessee also could not able to file how small cash withdrawal from ATM has been accumulated over a period of four years. The Assessing Officer, after considering relevant submissions has rightly made additions towards cash deposits and their order should be upheld.
We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The assessee has made cash deposits of Rs. 35,03,500/- during demonetization period into three bank accounts maintained with ICICI bank and AXIS bank, which includes one bank account maintained with her minor son,
:-5-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 where she has made cash deposits of Rs. 9,00,000/-, during demonetization period. Although, the assessee claims to have been received a sum of Rs. 16,00,000/- from Mr. Saleem Ahmed in view of bouncedcheques and same has been deposited into bank account, but fact remains that the assessee could not file any evidences including the details of property and also bouncedcheques. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the assessee could not able to prove source for cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 16,00,000/- claimed to have been received from Mr. Saleem Ahmed and thus, we uphold additions made by the Assessing Officer towards cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 16,00,000/-.
In so far as balance amount of Rs. 19,03,500/-, the arguments of the assessee was that she had cash in hand available which is more than the amount of cash deposits ofRs. 19,03,500/-, out of withdrawal from her bank account during past 2½ years. The assessee has filed details of cash withdrawals from financial year 2014-15 to financial year 2016-2017, which run into Rs. 45,85,700/-. We also carefully gone through pattern of cash withdrawals from bank account and as per details filed on record, the assessee has periodically
:-6-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 withdrawn cash from her bank account as and when her husband sends money from Kuwait. Although, cash withdrawals from bank account are very small in nature, but considering the fact that she has withdrawn huge amount from her bank account and also majority of her household expenses and other expenses are incurred through bank account, in our considered view availability of cash in hand to the extent of Rs. 19,05,300/- cannot be ruled out. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the arguments of the appellant for balance cash deposits of Rs. 19,05,300/- is out of cash withdrawal from same bank account appears to be reasonable and bonafide and thus, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete balance additions of Rs. 19,03,500/- towards cash deposits into her bank account including cash deposits to her minor son account. To sum up, the assessee gets partial relief of Rs. 19,03,500/- towards cash deposits made into her bank account during demonetization period and balance amount of Rs. 16,00,000/- towards cash deposits is hereby confirmed.
:-7-: ITA. No: 1223/Chny/2023 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the court on 28thFebruary, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- (मंजूनाथा. जी) (MANJUNATHA. G) लेखासद�य/Accountant Member
चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 28thFebruary, 2024 JPV आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3.आयकरआयु�/CIT 4..िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF
