2015 (9) TMI 1042 - AT - Income Tax

ITAT Pune: Appeals Allowed on Cash Deposits, Remitted for Fresh Assessment

Chimanlal Shambhuram Agarwal, Prakashchand Khelchand Agarwal Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-8 (1), Pune

The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune partially allowed the appeals of the assessees challenging the addition made by the Assessing Officer for cash deposits ... Unexplained source of cash deposits - contention of the ld. AR is that the cash amounts credited in the saving bank accounts are sale proceeds of standing crop, shesham trees and live stock - Held that:- We agree with the observations of the authorities below that the documents furnished by the assessee in support of their contentions are not full proof and the veracity of the documents furnished is not established. We find that the Assessing Officer has also not exercised his jurisdiction to verify the genuineness of the documents produced by the assessee. In our considered view there were deficiencies on the part of the assessee as well as Revenue to ascertain the authenticity of the transactions. The assessee has not placed on record Revenue records viz. Jamabandi, Khasra Girdwaries etc. to substantiate the presence of shesham trees, the nature of crop and the extent of crop grown on the agricultural land jointly held by the assessees and their brothers. Thus remit the file back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh after considering the relevant documents. As far as live stock is concerned, we do not find force in the argument of the ld. AR of the assessees. It is an admitted fact that the assessees have migrated to Pune (Maharashtra) 10-12 years back. It would be highly improbable that in the absence of the assessees anyone will take care of live stock for such a long period in the native village. More so, when the assessees have no intention to return to their roots in near future, it would be implausible to maintain live stock in native village. Therefore, we confirm the addition in respect of cash receipts from the sale of live stock. - Decided partly in favour of assessee for statistical purpose Issues involved:Assessment of cash deposits in saving bank accounts - Source of cash deposits questioned - Addition made by Assessing Officer - Appeals before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Second appeal before Tribunal challenging findings.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Pune involved appeals filed by assessees against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2009-10. The assessees were questioned regarding cash deposits in their saving bank accounts totaling significant amounts. The Assessing Officer observed cash deposits and sought explanations regarding the source of these funds. The assessees claimed the cash deposits were from sales proceeds of various items like live stock, agriculture produce, and old household furniture. However, the Assessing Officer made additions to the income based on these cash deposits.The assessees contended that the cash deposits were proceeds from the sale of assets like standing crop, shesham trees, and live stock. They provided details of the sales and presented confirmation statements from buyers. The Tribunal noted that the evidence presented lacked authenticity and the Assessing Officer did not verify the genuineness of the transactions. The assessees failed to provide revenue records to substantiate their claims regarding the presence of assets like shesham trees and the extent of crop grown on their agricultural land.Regarding the sale of live stock, the Tribunal found it improbable that the assessees, who had migrated to Pune years ago, would still maintain live stock in their native village. Consequently, the Tribunal confirmed the addition in respect of cash receipts from the sale of live stock. However, due to deficiencies in verifying the authenticity of transactions, the Tribunal remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The assessees were directed to provide necessary revenue records, and the Assessing Officer was instructed to reevaluate the issue after considering relevant documents and verifying the authenticity of the evidence presented.In conclusion, the appeals of the assessees were partly allowed for statistical purposes, and the case was sent back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment based on the provided instructions.