Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी िव"म िसंह यादव, लेखा सद" एवं "ी परेश म. जोशी, "ाियक सद" BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM &SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM आयकर अपील सं./ िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Parwinder Kaur बनाम The ITO Vill-Ambe Majra, Mand iGobindgarh Ward-1, Fatehgarh Sahib-Punjab-147301 Chandigarh "ायीलेखासं./PAN NO: DWDPK0871H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A राज" कीओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09/12/2024 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 17/12/2024 आदेश/Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. :
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 03/04/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18 wherein the sole ground relates to confirmation of addition of Rs. 11,90,000/- made by the AO under Section 69A of the Act.
Briefly the facts of the case are that the Assessing officer was in receipt of information that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs. 11,90,000/- in her bank account maintained with Punjab & Sind Bank during the demonetization period and given that no return of income was filed by the assessee, notice under section 142(1) was issued. However, in response to that, there was no compliance and thereafter, information was sought from the bank under section 133(6) and assessee was again issued a notice under section 142(1) to show cause as to why assessment may not be completed under the provisions of Section 144 of the Act. Given the non compliance to the initial notice as well as the show cause, the assessment was subsequently completed under section 144 of the Act wherein the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs.
11,90,0000/- being the cash deposited in the bank account maintained by the assessee holding the same as unexplained money and in absence of any explanation submitted by the assessee explaining the nature and source of the cash deposit.
Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said findings. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee belongs to a rural background and has no independent source of income other than the agricultural activity carried out by her family. Regarding cash deposit of Rs. 11,00,000/- on 12/11/2016, it was submitted that it is an admitted fact that the said cash was deposited on the said date and at the same time, it was submitted that the assessee had withdrawn equivalent cash amounting to Rs. 11,00,000/- on 07/11/2016 as evident from the bank statement and therefore the source of cash so deposited during the demonetization period is out of the withdrawal so made by the assessee within a short period of five days and the said fact has not been properly appreciated by the AO as well as by the Ld.CIT(A) in spite of the fact that the bank statement was on record by the AO. It was further submitted that the remaining amount of Rs. 29,000/- was deposited on 11/11/2016 and Rs. 49,000/- on 17/11/2016 which were also out of the earlier withdrawals from the bank account. It was accordingly submitted that the source of the cash so deposited is evident from the bank statement of the assessee itself and therefore the addition so made be directed to be deleted.
Per contra, the Ld. DR drawn our reference to the bank statement of the assessee stating that on 03/11/2016, the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 4,57,000/- and on 04/11/2016, there is a cheque deposit of Rs. 7,00,000/- and therefore prior to 07/11/2016, there were cash and cheque deposit which has not been properly explained by the assessee.
In his rejoinder, the Ld. AR submitted that these deposits were out of the proceeds of the sale of the agricultural produce as evident from the fact that it was a harvesting time and in any case, no adverse findings has been recorded by the AO as far as the deposits of the cash and cheque deposit on 03 & 04/11/2016 is concerned.