TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (7) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....37,250/-. The assessment was framed u/s 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 and Rs.21,65,000/- was added to the income of assessee u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This amount was cash deposited in his saving bank account No.31796 maintained with the Canara Bank, Wazirpur, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi during the relevant financial year. The CIT (A) has granted the relief to the assessee by holding as under :- "5. I have carefully considered the facts of the case. I had also obtained a copy of the statement u/s 131 recorded by the learned AO of Shri Bharat Bhushan and Smt. Narinder Sachdeva, during the course of remand report proceedings. On careful consideration of the above facts, I find that there is no dispute that an amount of Rs.23.45 lakhs wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....levant so far as verifying the source of cash is concerned. Transaction between a husband and wife, whether be called it a loan or gift or otherwise, will not affect the genuineness of the source of the deposit, which was clearly shown to have been withdrawn from the bank account of M/s. Ocean Trading Company. No alternative use of this cash was indicated, justifying or proving in whatever manner by the learned AO, in the hands of Smt. Ocean Trading Company and Smt. Narinder Sachdeva, Shri Pavitar Singh Sachdeva, the appellant or Shri Bharat Bhushan. In the absence of any specific inquiry or evidence derived by the learned AO, I find that the learned AO's remand report itself is a concocted story. I, therefore, hold that the remand report f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder. Therefore, the non-compliance by the appellant is fully explained by the circumstances not in his control. In view of the above, the additions made by the learned AO are deleted." 3. Now, the revenue is in appeal before us by taking the following grounds of appeal :- "(i) On the facts and under the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.21,65,000/- made by the A.O. u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. (ii) On the facts and under the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.21,65,000/- made by the A.O. u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by ignoring the facts that the assessee during the assessment proceedings has himself accepted that he does not maintain any book o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he relevant period also reflect the cash withdrawal from the bank account and also the withdrawal made by Smt. Narinder Sachdeva from her capital account for the purchase of the property. The person with whom the deal of purchase of property was made has also confirmed the fact regarding the transaction entered into for purchase of the property. The CIT (A) has provided adequate opportunity to the Assessing Officer. Additional evidences filed before the CIT (A) were duly admitted as per rules and remand report was also called from Assessing Officer. Thus, in view of these facts, the CIT (A)'s order is justified and deserved to be sustained. 7. We have heard both the sides on the issue. Facts on record show that there was sufficient cash ....