Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM]
ORDER
Per Shri M. Balaganesh, AM:
This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XX, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 208/CIT(A)-XX/Ward-36(2)/2011-12/Kol dated 12.08.2013. Assessment was framed by ITO, Ward-36(2), Kolkata u/s. 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for AY 2009-10 vide his order dated 28.10.2011.
The first issue to be decided in this appeal of assessee is as to whether the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in upholding the addition made in the sum of Rs.11 lacs in respect of cash deposits made by the assessee in her bank account in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Brief facts of this issue are that the assessee filed her return of income declaring taxable income of Rs.2,13,320/-. The assessee filed the Balance Sheet after considering the entire bank account transaction and other transactions before the AO. The assessee also produced copy of bank account maintained with Indian Overseas Bank wherein the Ld. AO observed that there was a single cash deposit of Rs. 11 lac in the bank account of the assessee on 23.10.2008. When assessee was confronted by the AO on the same, the assessee replied that she had withdrawn Rs. 10 lacs on 06.08.2008 and Rs. 1 lac on 11.09.2008 for the purpose of acquiring a plot of land which deal did not materialize and accordingly, she chose to redeposit the money in her bank account. Accordingly, it was formed that there was no case for making any addition in this regard. The Ld. AO, however, not convinced with this argument of the assessee and observed that is highly unreliable that any person would hold such a huge cash for a period of two months and then redeposit the same in bank account. Accordingly, he brought the same to tax Rs.
2 Sunita Jajodia AY 2009-10 11 lacs as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act, which was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) on first appeal. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us on the following grounds:
1. .a) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in treating cash deposits of Rs.11,00,000/- in the bank account of the assessee on 23.10.2008 as income from undisclosed sources, when the source was clearly explained by withdrawal of Rs.10,00,000/- on 06.10.2008 and Rs.1,00,000/- on 11.09.2009 from the bank account of the assessee itself. b) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO erred in making addition of Rs.11,00,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. The action of the AO was wholly unreasonable, uncalled for and bad in law. The Ld. CIT(A) was unjustified in confirming the action of the A.O.
The Ld. AR produced the copy of bank pass book in support of his claim of cash withdrawals made on the aforesaid dates, supra. He also produced the cash book of the assessee together with the Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2008 (opening Balance sheet) and Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2009 relevant to AY under appeal. In response to this, Ld. DR vehemently relied on the order of the AO.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find from the perusal of the records and the papers available in the paper book comprising of cash book, opening Balance Sheet, Balance Sheet for the year under appeal and bank statements of the assessee, we are convinced that the withdrawals made by the assessee on 06.08.2008 and 11.09.2008 goes to prove the source of cash deposit made on 23.10.2008. Hence, we have no hesitation in directing the Ld. AO to delete the addition made in the sum of Rs.11 lacs. Accordingly, the ground of appeal of assessee is allowed.
The next issue is in respect of charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. We find that the charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act is consequential in nature and AO will recompute the same accordingly.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.