Unexplained cash and fixed deposits: self-generated records were insufficient, but renewals of earlier deposits were not new investment.

Cash claimed as available for tax payment was sustained as unexplained money where the assessee relied only on self-generated cash book and balance sheet entries and failed to produce independent corroboration for the alleged cash-in-hand, except for the accepted receipt from the proprietary concern. Fixed deposits were not treated as unexplained investment because bank certificates and ledger records showed they arose on maturity of earlier deposits and represented rotation of existing funds. The enhanced tax rate under section 115BBE was held inapplicable for assessment year 2017-18. The cross-appeals were thus partly allowed, with the cash addition sustained, the fixed-deposit addition deleted, and the higher rate of tax rejected.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the addition made on account of cash payment of income tax as unexplained money was sustainable to the extent of the alleged cash-in-hand, (ii) whether the fixed deposits made during the year constituted unexplained investment, and (iii) whether the enhanced rate of tax under section 115BBE applied to assessment year 2017-18.

Issue (i): whether the addition made on account of cash payment of income tax as unexplained money was sustainable to the extent of the alleged cash-in-hand.

Analysis: The assessee relied on a personal cash book and balance sheet to explain availability of cash, but no independent supporting evidence was produced for the claimed cash-in-hand of Rs. 9,19,797/-. The claimed receipt of Rs. 6 lakh from the proprietary concern was accepted, but the balance source was not substantiated by material beyond self-generated records.

Conclusion: The addition was sustained to the extent of Rs. 9,19,797/- and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Issue (ii): whether the fixed deposits made during the year constituted unexplained investment.

Analysis: The assessee produced bank certificates and ledger material showing that the impugned fixed deposits were made on maturity of earlier deposits and not from a fresh unexplained source. The deposits were therefore treated as a renewal or rotation of existing funds rather than a new investment for the relevant year.

Conclusion: The addition of Rs. 75,48,870/- was deleted and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): whether the enhanced rate of tax under section 115BBE applied to assessment year 2017-18.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its view that the enhanced rate introduced by the amendment was not applicable for assessment year 2017-18.

Conclusion: The levy at the enhanced rate was held to be inapplicable and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The cross-appeals were disposed of by sustaining the cash-payment addition, deleting the fixed-deposit addition, and holding that the enhanced tax rate could not be applied for the relevant assessment year.

Ratio Decidendi: A cash claim supported only by self-generated records without independent corroboration can be sustained as unexplained, whereas fixed deposits shown to arise from maturity of earlier deposits are not unexplained investments, and the enhanced section 115BBE rate does not apply to assessment year 2017-18.

---