KUNHI KOYATHENGAL SAKIM THANGAL MULLAKOYA,THRISSUR vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE INT. TAX, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 202/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 August 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer and DRP did not consider the peak amount or telescoping of withdrawals. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 40.90 lakhs as unexplained money on account of cash deposits in his bank accounts. The assessee had made numerous cash deposits and withdrawals over a period of time.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of unexplained money under Section 69A was justified without considering the peak balance or telescoping of withdrawals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 20.08.2024Pronounced: 22.08.2024

This assessee’s appeal, for the assessment year 2014- 2015, arise against the order of the Disputes Resolution Panel-2 [“DRP’’], Bengaluru, Bengaluru’s directions u/sec.144C(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the "Act").

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2 ITA.No.202/COCH./2023 2. It emerges at the very out that the assessee’s sole substantive grievance canvassed in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the learned lower authorities action making sec.69A unexplained money addition of Rs.40.90 lakhs representing cash deposits made in his bank account(s). Learned counsel invited our attention to assessment discussion in page-2 that the assessee had in fact carried-out 77 entries of cash deposits and withdrawals for the period from 02.03.2013 to 31.03.2014 involving varying sums. That being the case, there is no rebuttal from the department’s side either indicating the learned assessing authority to have gone by the peak amount or any telescoping of the corresponding withdrawals either in the course of assessment or in learned Dispute Resolution Panel’s [DRP] directions.

3.

Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to direct the assessee to file his cash flow statement as well as reconciliation of all the withdrawals/alleged deposits before the learned Assessing Officer for his fresh appropriate examination within three effective opportunities at his own risk and responsibility. The Assessing Officer shall indeed consider the 3 ITA.No.202/COCH./2023 same as per law in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.08.2024.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →