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>Cash deposits explained as re-deposited withdrawals after failed construction; matching entries quash assessing officer's addition, appeal allowed</h1> <h3>Bhikhabhai Mangalbhai Patel Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4 (1) (1), Vadodara.</h3> ITAT held that cash deposits in the appellant's bank accounts were explained: withdrawn funds were re-deposited after proposed construction did not ... Cash deposited in appellant’s bank account - HELD THAT:- As the construction activity did not materialize, the withdrawn funds were re-deposited into the same bank accounts. On verification, we find that the deposits are duly supported by corresponding withdrawals from the same bank accounts. Source of deposits stands satisfactorily explained. Hence, the addition made by the Assessing Officer cannot be sustained. Appeal of the assessee is allowed. Assessment year 2017-18: Addition of Rs. 15,00,000 made by Assessing Officer on account of cash deposits in three bank accounts (Rs.5,00,000; Rs.7,00,000; Rs.3,00,000) was challenged. Assessee produced bank statements showing corresponding withdrawals dated 18.07.2016 which were later redeposited on 14-25.11.2016. Assessee's explanation: withdrawals were for house construction which did not materialize, hence funds were re-deposited into the same accounts. Tribunal examined records and found that 'the deposits are duly supported by corresponding withdrawals from the same bank accounts.' On that basis, Tribunal held that the 'source of deposits stands satisfactorily explained,' and therefore the addition of Rs.15,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer 'cannot be sustained.' Appeal allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
