TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l without sufficient time to analyse and file return under section 153C, therefore assessment u1s 144 is bad in law. 2. The CIT(A) erred in law and facts of the case in confirming the addition of Ps, 9,36,500/- made in assessment. 3. The CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer have erred in law and facts of the case adding Rs. 9,36,500/- being cash deposited in Bank on mere suspicion and presumption that it belongs Your Appellant ignoring the deposition of Smt. U Rajyalakshmi. 4. The CIT(A) having called for the records and assessment orders of Suit. U Rajyalakshmi ought to have given an opportunity to verify the same and explain the facts, after considering the same ought to have deleted the addition. 5. Your Appellant submits that the addition is not based on any seized material but based on cash deposited in bank account, the addition is bad in law and may be deleted. 3. Ground No.1 is related to the issue of not providing the seized material to the assessee well in advance to analyze and file the return of income. This ground is common to all the appeals for the Assessment Years of 2008-09 to 2011-12. A search u/s 132 was conducted in the case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee. It is found from the bank accounts that the assessee has made huge cash deposits in the bank accounts for the A.Y. 2008-09 to 2011-12 as under : Name of the A/c holder (Sri/Smt.) Name of the Bank Account No. Deposits (In Rs.) Financial Year 2007-08 relevant to A.Y. 2008-09 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100081449 9,36,500 Total 9,36,500 Financial Year 2008-09 relevant to A.Y. 2009-10 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100081449 4,35,000 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 1,13,400 Total 5,48,400 Financial Year 2009-10 relevant to A.Y. 2010-11 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 10,99,000 Total 10,99,000 Financial Year 2010-11 relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 D. Srinivas Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 193010100127189 17,63,000 D.Padmalath Axis Bank, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 910010042334221 7,65,000 Total 25,28,000 Total Deposits for the F.Ys. 2005-06 to 2011-12 relevant to A.Ys. 2006-07 to 2012-1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o not belong to him and that they belong to Smt. Uppu Rajyalakhnii and his brother, Sri D. Sampath. The appellant has further contested that the said cash deposits are made for making payments to the landlords from whom Smt. Uppu Rajyalakshmi has purchased Lands. No credible evidence in support of his claim was produced in this regard. 4.2. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer has made the assessment on the issue of cash deposits and there was no evidence that either Smt.Uppu Rajyalakshmi or Sri D. Sampath has owned up the bank account of the appellant as claimed by him before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the arguments of the appellant that the deposits in his bank account belong to Smt. Uppu Rajyalakshmi and his brother is prima facie not correct and hence rejected. There is no deviation from the facts and circumstances of the present case as that of Sri D. Sampath wherein I have held the similar view. Following the rule of consistency, I uphold the order of the Assessing Officer in this case. In view of the facts discussed above, I am constrained to confirms the addition of Rs. 9,36,500/- made by the Assessing Officer as there are no emerging in suppo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the file of the AO to arrive at the true and correct income. The assessee must submit the necessary information explaining the sources of deposits, and the application of withdrawals before the AO to consider the issue on merits. Accordingly we set aside the order of the lower authorities and remit the issue back to the file of the AO fresh consideration. Needless to say that the AO should give more opportunity to the assessee to explain the case. Accordingly. the appeals of the assessee for the A.Ys 2008-09 to 2011-12 on this ground are allowed for statistical purpose. 8. Ground No.4 is related to the contention of the assessee that the CIT(A) ought to have verified the records and the assessment order of Smt. U Rajya Lakshmi and given an opportunity to the assessee. During the appeal hearing this ground was withdrawn by the Ld.AR therefore, this ground is dismissed as withdrawn for the A.Ys.2008-09 to 2011-12. 9. Ground No.5 is related to the assessment made on the basis of bank deposits instead of the seized material. During the appeal hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the search u/s 132 was conducted in the case of Shri D.Sampath and notices u/s 153C was issued t....