2018 (6) TMI 1229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....27,580/-. During the course of assessment, Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that there were cash deposits in A/c No. 403309318 maintained with Indian Bank, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad. The details of cash deposits are as under: Sl. No. Date Particulars Amount (Rs) 1 21-07-2009 Interest 84 2 24-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,27,000 3 25-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,66,080 4 26-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,00,000 5 27-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,00,000 6 29-11-2009 By cash deposit Deposit by self 3,00,000 7 28-02-2010 By cash deposit Deposit by self 1,78,800 2.1. Assessee was asked to explain the sources for the deposits by the AO and in response to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... b) Tolaram Daga Vs CIT (1966) [59 ITR 632] (Assam.); c) CIT Vs Daulat Ram Ramatmull, (1973) [87 ITR 349] (SC); d) Sarogi Credit Corporation Vs CIT (1976) [103, ITR 344] (Pat); e) Rohini Builders (2002) [256 ITR 360] (Guj); f) Nemichand Kothari Vs CIT (2003) [264 ITR 254]; g) CIT Vs HS Builders Pvt Ltd (2012) [254 CTR (Raj) 542]; 3. Ld.CIT(A) directed the AO to submit a remand report on the written submissions filed by assessee. With regard to the deposits made on 25-11-2009 and 29-11-2009 in Indian Bank which are claimed to be gifts given by assessee's father, AO stated that letter dt. 16-03-2013 filed during the course of appeal proceedings constituted additional evidence and objected to the admission of additional evidence....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted to admit the same as additional evidence. 11.6 As per the reasons given by the Assessing Officer in the remand report, these documents are not admitted as additional evidence. The bank account No. 40330931-8 is already on record and account numbers 406690550, 403307479 are also on record. Copy of the tax return is also available on record. As such, these are not additional evidences and hence, not admitted. The appellant in spite of giving several opportunities did not prove the sources for cash deposits made in the bank account no. 403309318 maintained in Indian Bank, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad. The so called gift of Rs. 4,93,000/- from father has also not been proved. The confirmation letter filed before the Assessing Officer is no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in 24.11.2009 balance amount 1,73,000 in 25.11.2009 plus 1,93,000 given by father deposited in bank as on 25.11.09 1 & 17 4 26.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Deposited out of savings i.e., salary earned in US 24 & 25 5 27.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Deposited out of saving i.e., salary earned in u/s. 24 & 25 6 29.11.2009 By Self 3,00,000 Cash given by father deposited in bank 1 7 28.02.2010 By Self 1,78,800 Deposited out of savings i.e., salary earned in u/s. 24 & 25       17,71,964     6. Ld.DR, however, relied on the orders of the authorities. 7. After considering the rival contentions, we are unable to understand how Ld.CIT(A) can reject the evidence furnished by assessee under rule....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat an amount of Rs. 5 Lakhs has been withdrawn from account of assessee's NRE A/c, to that extent amount should have been given credit by the authorities. An amount of Rs. 10,78,800/- was deposited out of the so called traveler cheques and out of assessee's own funds, assessee being NRI and having substantial withdrawals from the US and also on the fact that he is a globe trotter being a senior employee. The explanation given by assessee cannot be simply rejected when he states that he encashed the traveler cheques and deposited cash in the bank account. 8.1. Considering the facts of the case and evidence furnished on record, we are satisfied that the amounts are explained and hence the addition is not warranted. We are surprised to note ....