TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 799
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ble. Moreover, the ld. CIT(A) is not justified to mention the applicability of provisions of Section 69 of the Act which was not under the Grounds of appeal or cause of action. That the provisions of Section 292B of the I.T. Act, 1961 are also not applicable because there is no mistake, the AO has made the addition u/s. 68 with the clear mind." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the AO obtained information that the assessee had an account in the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Ranipur More, Haridwar with the deposit of Rs. 500/- on 26.6.2003. On 28.6.2003, Rs. 30,75,000/- were deposited through transfer and on the same date an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- were withdrawn through cheque. On 4.7.2003 an amount of Rs. 3 lakh was further depos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ccount no. 4758), residence of 274 Rajpur Road, Dehradun. Subsequently, the Inspector of the Ward was deputed to conduct enquiry and he reported back that House No. 274 did not exist anywhere in the Rajpur Road area. Efforts were also made to trace out the said persons without success. Thus, the AO concluded that a forged account had been opened in the name of forged persons by the assessee himself. On further perusal of the assessee's record, the AO. observed that the assessee had sold some land to joint purchasers namely Smt. Urmila Rani, W/o Shri Ashwani Mittal, and Smt. Hemlata Walia, W/o Shri Pradeep Walia. Summons u/s 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961 were issued to both purchasers and their statement on oath, were recorded. In the statem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had thus utilized it. He concluded that since the sources of the money had not been satisfactorily explained by the assessee, it was nothing but an attempt to bring his unaccounted money into the main stream without paying any tax. He, therefore, added back the amount of Rs. 30,75,000/- to the income of the assessee uls 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and completed the assessment at Rs. 34,48,870/- vide his order dated 18.2.2015 passed u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Aggrieved with the assessment order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 3. Now the Assessee is aggrieved against the impugned order and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. At the threshold, Ld. Counsel of the Assessee has only....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tkar vs. ITO. I find considerable cogency in the assessee's counsel in relying upon the aforesaid decision of the ITAT, Mumbai. For the sake of clarity, I am reproducing the finding given vide para no. 9 & 9.1 of the ITAT, Mumbai decision dated 12.8.2016 in the case of Smt. Manasi Mahendra Pitkar vs. ITO, Mumbai passed in ITA Nos. 4223 & 4224 (Mum) of 2015 (AY 2011-12) as under:- "9. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the present case the addition has been made by the income tax authorities by treating the cash deposits in the bank account as an unexplained cash credit within the meaning of section 68 of the Act. The legal point raised by the assessee is to the effect that the bank Pass Book is not an account book maint....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tensibly, the circumstances in which the cash deposits have been made and the purpose for which such monies have been utilized is emerging from record and in any case, there is no material found by the Assessing Officer to disprove the same. Of course, the assessee could not produce any formal corroborative evidence of having received respective amounts from friends and relatives, so however, it is to be appreciated that section 68 is a rule of evidence; and, the Assessing Officer is expected to consider the explanation rendered in the context of the circumstances of each case. Be that as it may, since I have already held that the addition is unsustainable following the ratio of the judgment in the case of Shri Bhaichand N Gandhi (supra), I....