TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short "the Act". Heard both sides. Case file perused. 2. We come to assessee's appeal ITA No.958/Ahd/2013 first raising sole substantive ground challenging correctness of Section 69A addition of unexplained money of Rs. 24,08,001/- made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order dated 24.12.2010 as restricted to Rs. 15,34,000/- in course of the lower appellate proceedings. 3. The assessee individual is engaged in goldsmith business on labour basis. He made cash deposits in question of Rs. 24,08,001/- on various occasions in the relevant previous year. The Assessing Officer sought to know source thereof. The assessee's case was to have deposited the above stated cash sums from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... consent letter dated 09. 09. 2002 by the other legal heirs of appellant's father was filed with the Registrar Authority. The said consent letter is on stamp paper dt 05. 09.2002. In this background, the appellant stated that the WILL cannot be false WILL. The appellant explained the source of deposits in the said bank account as under :- Opening balance Rs. 697505 Sale Proceeds of Jewellery by pay order Rs. 400400 Dividend Rs. 3999 Interest on S B Account Rs. 20924 Cash deposited in Bank Rs. 1425000 Recd from Sushil Finance Rs. 215060 Refund of Application Money out of FCH issue Rs. 73440 Refund out of Application Money -Issue of Reliance Power Limited Rs. 179310 Wrong refund by Karvy ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds of the appellant for seven ye]ars and was sold only in Assessment Year 2008-09. 12.5 In absence of any evidence, regarding the same, appellant's claim of receiving sale proceeds of jewellery and its deposit in the bank account cannot be accepted irrespective of the payment of Rs. 4, 00, 400/- claimed by the appellant have been received by Pay Orders as no details of such Pay Orders have been furnished. Consequently, the deposit by way of Pay Orders of Rs. 4, 04, 000/- and cash deposits in bank of Rs. 14, 25, 000/- are treated as 'Unexplained deposits' in the bank account. However, the appellant had withdrawn cash to the extent of Rs. 2, 91,0007- prior to the first deposit in Asstt Year 2008-09. Therefore, benefit of rotati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e now come to Revenue's appeal ITA No.1263/Ahd/2013 seeking to revive unexplained investment addition of Rs. 37,93,213/- as made by the Assessing Officer and deleted in course of the lower appellate proceedings as under: "10 As per the appellant's submission, the opening balance in the account of M/s Sushil Finance Services Pvt Limited was Rs. 25, 600/-. Shares of Rs. 37, 67,613/- were purchased during the year. ! The total of these comes to Rs. 37,93,213/-. The assessing officer has added this amount. The appellant claimed that he sold shares worth Rs. 20, 58, 8237- during the year and therefore, the net payable amount to the broker came to Rs. 17, 34, 390/-. (Rs. 37, 93, 213 - Rs. 20, 58,823/-) only. Rs. 10,0007- continued as closi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of income and the 'shares purchased in both the accounts are 'unexplained investment' of the appellant. However, the assessing officer finally added a sum of Rs. 37,93, 213/- only. i.e. the gross purchase of Rs. 5, 58,1607- in the name his wife was not added. This leads to an interpretation that the Assessing Officer accepted the sales set off, in the hands of wife to the extent of Rs. 5,59,180/- against the purchase made in the name of wife. 10.3 However, in the case of share purchased in appellant's own name, the sale set off of Rs. 20, 58, 823/- has not been given. This is a contradiction in the assessment order. 10.4 It is a fact that the appellant has been making both purchase and sale through M/s Sushil Finance Securities....