TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the cash deposits were liable to be treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (ii) Whether the higher tax rate under the amended section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to the impugned addition and the consequential rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable.
Issue (i): Whether the cash deposits were liable to be treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The explanation accepted was that the impugned cash deposits represented redeposit of money earlier withdrawn from the bank, the initial funds having originated from cheques received on sale of property under distress sale. On the facts found, the assessee had no other source of income suggested by the record, and no contra material was brought to disprove the stated source or the movement of funds.
Conclusion: The addition under section 69A was not sustainable and was deleted, in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the higher tax rate under the amended section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to the impugned addition and the consequential rectification under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was sustainable.
Analysis: Once the addition itself was deleted, the question of applying the enhanced rate did not survive on the facts. Independently, the dispute was held to be covered by the cited High Court decision, supporting the assessee's claim that the amended rate could not be applied in the manner adopted by the lower authorities.
Conclusion: The enhancement of tax rate and the consequential rectification were set aside, in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: Both appeals were allowed and the additions, as well as the consequential enhancement of tax, did not survive.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee establishes a plausible and unrebutted source for cash deposits, an addition for unexplained money cannot be sustained; consequential enhancement of tax based on a deleted addition likewise fails.
TaxTMI 
