Unexplained cash deposits and interest chargeability: concluded findings cannot be reopened absent patent error, while later binding precedent prevails.

Miscellaneous proceedings under section 68 cannot be used to disturb additions for cash deposits already examined in the original appellate process, especially where the assessees failed to prove identity, creditworthiness and genuineness and no mistake apparent from the record was shown. A later binding jurisdictional precedent on interest under sections 234A and 234B overrides the earlier view relied on by the Tribunal, so deletion of such interest cannot survive once the later decision holds the interest chargeable on assessed income. The note therefore reflects a mixed result, with the assessees' challenge failing on unexplained cash deposits and the Revenue succeeding on interest.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the additions made on account of cash deposits in bank accounts were liable to be disturbed in miscellaneous proceedings under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; (ii) Whether the deletion of interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be sustained in view of the later jurisdictional precedent.

Issue (i): Whether the additions made on account of cash deposits in bank accounts were liable to be disturbed in miscellaneous proceedings under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The cash deposits had already been examined in the original appellate proceedings and the subsequent judicial determination had held that the assessees failed to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the alleged creditors. The deposits were therefore treated as unexplained and the departmental challenge did not disclose any surviving mistake apparent from the record warranting recall or modification.

Conclusion: The additions relating to cash deposits were not liable to be reopened or disturbed, and the assessee's miscellaneous applications failed on this issue.

Issue (ii): Whether the deletion of interest under sections 234A and 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be sustained in view of the later jurisdictional precedent.

Analysis: The later binding decision of the jurisdictional High Court had held that interest under section 234B is chargeable on assessed income and had distinguished the earlier view relied upon by the Tribunal. In light of that subsequent precedent, the basis for deleting the interest did not survive.

Conclusion: The departmental miscellaneous applications succeeded on this issue and the deletion of interest under sections 234A and 234B was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The miscellaneous applications filed by the assessees were rejected, while the departmental miscellaneous applications were accepted, resulting in a mixed outcome in favour of the Revenue overall.

Ratio Decidendi: A miscellaneous application cannot be used to disturb a concluded finding on unexplained cash deposits absent a patent error, and a later binding jurisdictional decision on chargeability of interest under section 234B governs the matter.

---