Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2016 (3) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ised the following ground of appeal : 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 10,44,800 being amount of cash deposited to the bank considering the same as income from undisclosed sources which is requested to be quashed. Your appellant prays for leave to add, to alter and/or to amend the above ground before the final hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated November 30, 2010, thereby the Assessing Officer (AO in short) made addition of Rs. 11,2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....down by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v. CIT [1995] 214 ITR 801 (SC). He submitted that in the present case, there are direct evidences demonstrating that the assessee was having cash balance. He submitted that no law prohibits the assessee for keeping the cash. Learned counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgment(s) of the hon'ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Shailesh Rasiklal Mehta [2009] 176 Taxman 270 (Guj) and of CIT v. Manoj Indravadan Choksi reported at [2014] 50 taxmann.com 419 (Guj). Learned counsel for the assessee also placed reliance on the judgment of the hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT v. Pesto Chem India Ltd. [1999] 240 ITR 672 (Delhi). ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....had withdrawn on June 26, 2007 of Rs. 83,000, on November 20, 2007 of Rs. 51,000, on December 14, 2007 of Rs. 1,28,000 and on January 7, 2008 of Rs. 2,00,000. From January 7, 2008 to November 20, 2011 the assessee had withdrawn total amount of Rs. 3,79,000. However, cash was deposited in the bank account after June 13, 2007 of Rs. 1,52,800. So far as the amount of Rs. 83,000 is concerned, i.e., matching from withdrawals and deposits and rest of the amount, there is a gap between withdrawals and deposits of the amount. In respect of deposit made on February 13, 2008 is also within one month from the withdrawal of amount on January 7, 2008. In respect of other entries, the cash withdrawal is even before one year of deposit of the amount. The ....