TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (6) TMI 522
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lternative contention of the appellant that cash on hand available with the appellant at the beginning of the year being Rs.17,17,794/- it is only remaining balance of cash deposit at the most that could be treated as income from undisclosed sources for the year under consideration and not the total deposits. 3. Facts in brief as emerged from the corresponding assessment order passed u/s.143(3) dated 12.12.2011 are that the assessee is a salaried employee and filed the income-tax return declaring an income of Rs.1,58,770/-. The assessee had disclosed capital gain on sale of gold ornaments. The AO had received an information according to which it was noticed that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs.18,85,945/- in Bank of India. The assessee has furnished the copy of bank account along with explanation of credit and debit entries, as appeared in the said bank account. In respect of the cash deposited in the bank, the explanation of the assessee was "cash on hand". That narration of the assessee has not convinced the AO, therefore a show-cause was issued asking the assessee to furnish cash book maintained by the assessee to prove the source of cash deposit in the Bank. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4,170/- for the accounting period ended on 31/03/2008 from the bank because the assessee was intending to purchase a property. That purchase-deed was not matured so the said withdrawal amount was redeposited, however a cash balance of Rs.2,36,849/- was with the assessee. Hence, the emphasis was that the cash balance available with the assessee was out of the withdrawals from the bank, therefore, the amount in question was not an unaccounted income of the assessee. The assessee has furnished the copies of the balance-sheets from the year-2004 to the year-2009 along with the copy of the capital account. The assessee has also furnished the cash flow statement to corroborate the cash deposits in the bank, starting from the year- 2004 to 2009. The assessee has explained the cash deposits in that fashion to the extent of Rs.17,17,794/-, however, it was also suggested that only the balance could be treated as unexplained deposit. The ld.CIT(A) was not convinced and made an observation that except scatchy handwritten cash flow statement, there was no other evidence furnished by the assessee. According to him, the cash flow statement was extremely doubtful. Ld.CIT(A) has also noted that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....placed reliance on ACIT vs. Buldev Raj Charla & Ors (2009)121 TTJ 366(Delhi), Shailesh Rasiklal Mehta (2009)176 Taxman 270 and ITO vs. Raj Rani Arya (2011) TaxPub (DT) 1200 (Del-Trib). She has also cited a decision of ITAT "C" Bench Ahmedabad pronounced in the case of Patel Prahladbhai Harjivanbhai vs. ITO in ITA No.2347/Ahd/2012 for A.Y. 2009-10 dated 15/03/2013. 6. From the side of the Revenue, ld.Sr.DR Mr.Rahul Kumar and opposed the arguments of ld.AR on the basis that the entire story of availability of cash was based upon the cooked up cash flow statements. He has placed reliance on the findings of the AO and CIT(A). He has contested that the assessee has not given any cogent evidence in support of the availability of huge cash balance. According to him, it was against human behaviour that once a bank account was maintained, then why huge cash balance was kept as cash in hand. Ld.DR has also drawn our attention on an evidence which was in the nature of sale of gold ornaments but according to him, there was no supporting bill and the sale proceeds remained unverifiable. 7. We have heard the submissions of both the sides at some length. We have also examined the cash flow stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of that very cash for some other purposes, then the re-deposit of cash in the bank out of the previous withdrawals cannot be ruled out. Upto this extent, we hereby hold in favour of the assessee that the cash to the extent of Rs.17,17,794/- available as on 31/03/2008 was redeposited. But still, there was a slight gap in the cash deposit made during the financial year 2008-09 to the extent of Rs.18,85,945/-. That gap of Rs.1,68,151/- remained unexplained. Considering the alternate plea as raised through Ground No.2, we hereby hold that this remaining balance should be taxed as undisclosed income in the hands of the assessee. In this manner, Ground Nos.1 & 2 are cumulatively decided and the assessee is hereby granted part relief as specified hereinabove. 8. Ground No.3 read as under:- 3. Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts in confirming action of AO in making addition of Rs.3,99,991/- claimed as Long term capital gain on sale of jewellery as income from undisclosed sources. Ld.CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the evidence that the impugned jewellery reflected in the Wealth Tax Returns filed by the appellant as described in valuation report. Ld.CIT(A) ought to have accepted Lon....