MOHD. REHAN IQBAL ANSARI,BALLAIA vs. ITO, WARD - 2(4), BALLIA

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the notice issued through RPAD as well as Email at the Email ID given in Form No. 36 filed by the assessee. It further transpires from the record that the hearing of the appeal has been adjourned for several times due to non appearance of the assessee and on the last date of hearing i.e. 20th April, 2022, the hearing of the appeal was adjourned at the request of the assessee. It is apparent that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal therefore, I propose to hear and dispose of the present appeal ex parte.

I have heard the learned DR and carefully perused the impugned orders of the authorities below. The learned DR has submitted that the Assessing Officer has specifically asked the assessee by issuing show cause notice to explain the source of cash deposit in the saving bank account of the assessee of Rs.

I have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. The assessee has not disputed the cash deposit of Rs. 12,00,000/- in the bank account of the assessee. The details of the cash deposit are given by the AO as under:-

The assessee has claimed the source of deposit before the AO as under:- “In response to the notice u/s 142(1), the assessee filed reply/details. Regarding source of deposit, the assessee stated that cash deposit in his Saving Account, maintained in SBI amounting to Rs. 12,00,000/-, between 22.08.2014 to 16.09.2014 is being done by his father Sri. Iqbal Ahmad from his personal income which had been earned from tailoring work. The assessee has also submitted the copy of return & capital A/c of his father Sh. Iqbal Ahmed.”

Thus, it is clear that the assessee has explained the source of income during the assessment proceedings as the entire amount belongs to his father being his personal income earned from tailoring work. The assessee also furnished the capital account for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 of his father as under:- Capital A/c as on 31.03.2013 Opening Balance Rs. 8,03,326.30 Add: Net Income Rs. 2,09,700.00 Less: Drawing Rs. 10,13,326.00 Rs. 66,000.00

Since the amounts deposited in the bank account were during the month of August and September, 2014 therefore, the capital account balance as on 31st March, 2014 plus the earning upto August, 2014 can be available with his father for providing the financial assistance to the assessee that comes around Rs. 10,40,000/-, if 50% of the income during the year is added to the balance as on 31st March, 2014. If the said amount is taken as a source of deposit in the bank account of the assessee then the balance as on 31st March, 2015 would be only around Rs. 3,00,000/- but the details given by the assessee regarding the capital account balance of his father on 31st March, 2015 at Rs. 13,27,036/- shows that nothing was withdrawn from the capital balance for giving the financial assistance to the assessee. Moreover, the closing balance in the capital account of the father of the assessee as on 31st March, 2014 and opening balance as on 1st April, 2014 are also not matching. It is clear that the closing balance on 31st March, 2014 is shown at Rs. 9,06,380/- whereas the opening balance as on 1st April, 2014 is shown at Rs. 11,13,386/-. Therefore, there is a difference of more than Rs. 2,00,000/- between the closing balance and opening balance. From the details of the capital account of the father of the assessee is established that no money was provided by the father to the assessee for depositing in his account. The CIT(A) has considered this issue in para 5 and 6 of the impugned order. The conclusion of CIT(A) in para 6 is as under:- “6. It is seen from the above that for the previous F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015-16, his father has shown opening capital of Rs. 11,13,386.30 to which net income of Rs. 2,84,550/- has been added and drawing of Rs. 70,900/- was made. The closing capital at the end of F.Y. has shown at Rs. 13,27,036.30/-. Thus it is clear that there is no withdrawal from the capital account from the father of the appellant which could explain his claim that source of cash deposit has been received from his father. Since the source of cash deposit in the bank account has not been explained either before the AO or before the appellate authority, I find no reason to interfere with the order of the AO and the addition made by the AO sustained and the appeal is dismissed.”

In the facts as discussed above, I do not find any error or illegality in the impugned order of the CIT(A), the same is upheld. The appeal of the assessee is dismissed.