Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA
(Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Dhinal Shah, AR Assesseeby : Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr.DR Revenue by सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 18/01/2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement: 24/01/2024 आदेश/O R D E R The present appeal has been filed by the assesseeagainst order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short referred to as ld.CIT(A)] under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 8.8.2023 pertaining to Asst.Year 2012-13.
The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:
“The learned CIT[A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,08,000 towards the alleged unexplained cash deposition to the bank account inasmuch as the assessee has furnished a detailed explanation for all the cash deposited in the bank account during the year under consideration. The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,08,000 towards the alleged unexplained cash deposition to the bank account inasmuch as neither Assessing Officer nor learned CIT9A) has mentioned the section of the Income Tax Ac under which the addition is made and 2 therefore non-mentioning the precise provision of law makes the impugned addition bad in law.
Solitary issue in the present appeal relates to the addition made to the income of the assessee on account of cash deposits in bank account remaining unexplained amounting to Rs.13,08,000/-.
I have heard the rival contentions and also gone through the orders of the authorities below. I have noted that the assessee had furnished complete details of the source of cash deposit of Rs.13,08,000/- in her bank account. Each and every entry of cash deposits in that bank account was traced either to cash withdrawal from other bank accounts where credit of FD maturity was shown to be deposited or was traced to bank account of her husband, from where cash were shown to be withdrawn and deposited in these bank account. During the course of hearing before me, the ld.counsel for the assessee filed copy of statement of her account with Tarapur Co-op Urban Bank Ltd where the impugned cash was deposited and also Copies of bank accounts wherein the maturity proceeds of the FD were re-deposited . These documents were furnished before me at PB Page No.2, 7, 10, 12 & 15.
In the light of the above, I see no reason to treat the cash deposit as from unexplained source. Merely because the husband of the assessee kept the cash withdrawn with him for six months, is no reason to disbelieve the explanation of the assessee that the cash withdrawn was re-deposited. There may be number of reasons for retaining the cash withdrawn and unless the Revenue finds the amounts withdrawn to have been utilized and expended else-where, the explanation of the assessee needs to be accepted. Similarly, the assessee having explained the source of the rest of the cash deposits, as originating from FDs which maturity proceeds and 3 credit in the bank accounts of the assessee has not been controverted by the Revenue, the entire cash deposited in the bank account of Rs.13,08,000/-, I hold stands explained. The addition made, therefore, by the AO under section 69A of the Act is directed to be deleted.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the Court on 24th January, 2024 at Ahmedabad.