https://www.taxtmi.com/css/info/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.css?v=1746094055 https://www.taxtmi.com Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services Tax Management India. Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved. One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260278 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260278 Undisclosed investment - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Appellant had sufficient amount of cash available as per the cash book so as to enable to him to make the investment of the above amounts. Regarding the objection of the AO, that the cash withdrawn might have been spent by the appellant somewhere else and there was no chance of the appellant having cash in hand with him sufficient enough to make cash deposits with the bank from which the investment has been made by the appellant, find that the objection of the AO is not supported by any hard evidence and is based on general observation. Since there is no cogent material before the AO to support his above suspicion of the appellant having spent the cash balance on some other activities, a relief of Rs. 6,63,300/- correctly allowed - Decided against revenue. Unaccounted investment in FDR - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The cash account of the appellant and from the perusal of the cash account, it is find that there was sufficient balance in the cash account on 5/1/05 from which the cash deposit of Rs. 35,000/-could have been made. The AO has no material to justify his suspicion that earlier cash withdrawals from bank have been spent or invested by the appellant somewhere else, and in the absence of such material, no adverse view can be taken against the appellant. Therefore allow this ground of appeal and delete the addition for Rs. 10 lakhs. - Decided against revenue. Addition to loan given to Smt. Rita Dhingra - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The loan transaction, as entered into between the parties, is to be verified with reference to the question whether this transaction of loan involves transfer of funds which needs to be explained. In this case, there is nothing which needs to be explained when source of the same FDR has already been considered by the AO himself in his order. So far as the remaining amount of Rs. 1,05,000/- is concerned, the AO has accepted the source of this being out of 3 months' rent @ Rs. 35,0001- per month collected and credited in bank account of appellant wherein his wife Mrs. Rita Dhingra was a joint holder of account and also this rent has been declared by the appellant in his return of income for A.Y. 2005-06. Accordingly, the entire addition for Rs. 11,05,000/- being explained is directed to be deleted. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of drawing for personal expenses - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- There is no difference in the accounted personal expenses as per the information given during assessment proceedings and therefore, source of the above personal expenses stand explained in view of reconciliation of cash flow statement. Regarding the balance amount of Rs. 1,29,521/-the AO has not raised any objection on the appellant's explanation in his report. It is observed that this balance amount for Rs. 1,29,521/- consists of LIC Premium for Rs. 1,07,4711-; mediclaim insurance for Rs. 17,995/- and Travel Insurance for Rs. 4055/-. All these payments have been made through cheques from the Account of G&J Apparels and are, therefore, explained. Therefore AO is directed to delete the addition - Decided against revenue. Addition to unexplained cash credits - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- AO has not considered the cash withdrawals of Rs. 1,89,000/- which he himself has taken in para-vii of the remand report and there is no reason given by the AO for omitting the above withdrawals to work out the availability of the cash deposits. Accordingly, the explanation of the appellant regarding these source of cash deposits stand explained and there is no justification for addition of Rs. 1,44,000/- - Decided against revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530