TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (11) TMI 1678
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dual and he submitted his return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 93,959/- which included salary income, rental income and interest on deposits. During the assessment year under consideration, the assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 19.60 lakhs on different dates in cash with ICICI bank, Ludhiana. The Assessing officer required the assessee to explain the source of deposits in the said bank. In response to the said query, the assessee submitted following documents:- a) Copy of balance sheet along with assets and liabilities as on 31.3.2007 b) Copy of balance sheet along with assets and liabilities as on 31.3.2008 c) Copy of cash flow statement showing cash available as on 1.4.2007, deposits during the period ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3,48,638/- stands fully explained. The Assessing officer's contention that the appellant has shown cash-in-hand at almost 21 times is therefore, not correct. . The cash available on 01.04.2007 being out of cash withdrawals from the loan taken by the appellant have been duly explained by the appellant along with the evidences for the same. 4.7 As per the cash flow statement submitted by the appellant, the appellant had withdrawn "various amounts in the month of May and June, 2007 from his bank accounts and the total cash available with him as on 01.07.2007 was Rs. 17,34 6387-. The AO in his report dated 23.07.2012, has not pointed out any discrepancy with regard to these claims of the appellant regarding the withdrawals from the ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as withdrawn on a particular date also does not imply that the cash already withdrawn on earlier dates had been utilized. The AO has pointed out that in case the appellant was actually having cash-in-hand of Rs. 13,48,638/- as on 01.04.2007, there was hardly any reason for making further cash withdrawals. This observation of the AO is based on conjectures and surmises and is without any basis. The appellant had explained during the course of assessment proceedings that cash was withdrawn with the intention to buy some property. The actual amount of cash required by the appellant in these circumstances would be known to the appellant only. There is no bar in keeping the cash at home according to requirements. 4.9 The Assessing offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....February, 2007 to October, 2007 and' the appellant has duly discharged the onus lying on him to explain the source of cash deposits. The addition made by the AO is therefore deleted and these grounds of appellant are accordingly allowed" 4. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused also the materials assailable on record. Shri Sudhir Sehgal Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Assessing officer while completing the assessment had totally overlooked the details of cash in hand available with the assessee as per balance sheet as on 31.3.2007. He further pointed out that regular books of accounts are being maintained by the assessee and all the entries of cash withdrawals and cash deposits are duly recorded in the cash....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wals from the bank account. The Ld. CIT(A) has categorically stated that the copy of the bank account, cash flow statement and the balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 and 31.3.2008 were submitted before the Assessing officer. All the entries in the cash flow statement were duly recorded from the bank accounts and represented the various cash withdrawals and cash deposits made by the assessee after availing the bank loan of Rs. 20 Lakhs. The Ld. CIT(A) has also rejected this contention of the Assessing officer that the assessee had made need based cash withdrawals from his bank account. Subsequent withdrawals were made only after the withdrawals made earlier had been utilized by the assessee. According to CIT(A), merely because cash was withdrawn ....