TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal dismisses Revenue's appeal, upholds CIT decision on cash deposits & income additions</h1> <h3>Income Tax Officer, Ward : 1 (2) (2), Dehradun. Versus Shri Raman Kapoor</h3> Income Tax Officer, Ward : 1 (2) (2), Dehradun. Versus Shri Raman Kapoor - TMI Issues:Appeal against order of CIT (Appeals) for assessment year 2009-10.Analysis:1. Cash Deposits and Undisclosed Income:The Assessing Officer treated cash deposits of Rs.1,04,99,400/- as undisclosed income from other sources. The assessee explained that the deposits were from previous withdrawals and capital contributed by AOP members. The CIT (Appeals) considered the evidence provided by the assessee, including cash flow statements and bank statements, and deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT (Appeals) observed regular deposits and withdrawals in the bank account, concluding that the peak credit of Rs.21,59,522/- should be considered as undisclosed income, which was upheld by the Tribunal.2. Income from M/s. Vardhman Industrial Estate:The Assessing Officer treated Rs.76,50,000/- received from M/s. Vardhman Industrial Estate as income from other sources, as the assessee failed to provide evidence of receiving the amount or registering any land. However, the CIT (Appeals) considered the evidence presented by the assessee, including confirmations from M/s. Vardhman Industrial Estate, and documents showing land transfers. The CIT (Appeals) deleted the additions, stating that the assessee acted as a commission agent for M/s. Vardhman Industrial Estate, facilitating land purchases. The Tribunal upheld this decision, noting that the evidence supported the assessee's claims.3. Judicial Decision:The Tribunal upheld the CIT (Appeals)'s decision to delete the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding cash deposits and income from M/s. Vardhman Industrial Estate. The Tribunal found the evidence provided by the assessee, including confirmations and documents, to be credible and sufficient to support the assessee's explanations. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT (Appeals) that the additions should be deleted based on the evidentiary support presented. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the order of the CIT (Appeals) was upheld.
TaxTMI 