2018 (3) TMI 1358

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ending for about 12 years. The appellant had no knowledge that the matter was taken up for hearing on 14th November, 2017 and thereafter on 15th November, 2017. For the reasons stated in the application, we are satisfied that nonappearance on 14th and 15th November, 2017 was not intentional and has been satisfactorily explained. The application is allowed and the appeal is restored to its original number. ITA 315/2005 With the consent of the Counsel for the parties the appeal is taken up for hearing. 2. The present appeal by Jaya Aggarwal, an individual, relates to assessment year 1998-99 and arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal, for short) dated 25th April, 2004 in ITA No.3354/Del/2002. 3. The appeal w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mmoveable property i.e. basement located at 19A, Arjun Nagar, New Delhi, but as the deal did not materialize, Rs. 1,60,000/- was deposited in the bank on 13th January, 1998. Additional evidence in a form of a certificate issued by M/s. S.G. Realtors was filed. However, the appeal was dismissed observing that the certificate given by M/s. S.G. Realtors was not conclusive proof that the cash deposited was out of the Rs. 2,00,000/-, withdrawn earlier. Onus to prove source of money deposited was on the appellant, which had not been discharged by showing nexus between the cash withdrawn and cash deposited. 6. Appellant thereafter preferred second appeal before the Tribunal, which as noticed above, has been dismissed by the impugned order dated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r in withdrawing the money from the bank at any time before deal was finalized to pay earnest money. 8. We find it difficult to accept the approach and findings recorded for several reasons. The brief order does not examine and consider the entire explanation and material on record as withdrawal of Rs. 2,00,000/- in cash was undisputed. Naturally, the huge withdrawal was for a purpose and objective. From the beginning the explanation given was that withdrawal was to pay earnest money for purchase of immovable property, which deal did not fructify. Explanation given was not fanciful and sham story. It was perfectly plausible and should be accepted, unless there was justification and ground to hold to the contrary. Delay of some months in re....