TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 506
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee had made deposits by way of cash and cheques in his bank accounts maintained with HDFC Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank aggregating to Rs. 4,36,150/- and Rs. 18,11,765/- respectively. When the assessee was called upon by the AO to explain the source of the said deposits, the following details were furnished by the assessee in respect of deposits found to be made in his bank account with HDFC Bank:- date Amount Remarks by assessee 24.04.2009 Rs.10500/- Received from rubi biswas to pay air Ticket purchased for her via HSBC card. Paid on 30.04.2010 06.05.2009 Rs.10600/- Received from rubi biswas to pay air ticket purchased for her via HSBC card. Paid on 11.05.2010 15.05.2009 Rs.56500/- Sale of old jewelry to Satyajit Ghosh 29.07.2009 Rs.13000/- Received from Srijoni in cash paid to ASP on 12.08.2009 for advertisement in Iarnshedpur published on 07.08.2009 19.08.2009 Rs.11550/- Received from rubi biswas to pay Puri booking tickets trough HSBC card. Paid HSBC on 25.08.2009 11550/-19.10.2009 Rs. 5000/-Redeposited of cash withdrawal on 15.10.2009 27.10.2009 Rs.40000/- Received from Ruby Biswas. Paid to MCCS on 04.11.2009 30,0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some of the bills produced by the assessee to establish the business activities carried on by his wife. Accordingly, the entire deposits of Rs. 18,11,765/- found to be made in the bank account of the assessee with Kotak Mahindra Bank were treated by the AO as unexplained and addition to that extent was made by him to the total income of the assessee in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) by an order dated 13.03.2013. 5. Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before Ld.CIT(A) and since the submissions made by the assessee while challenging the additions of Rs. 4,35,150/- and 18,11,765/- were not found acceptable by him, Ld.CIT(A) proceeded to confirm both these additions made by the AO for the following reasons given in his impugned order:- "I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the assessee. As will be evident in the succeeding paras the above mentioned cash deposits are not the only cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. In fact there are other cash deposits of Rs. 18,11,765/ in Kotak Mahindra Bank which are being dealt in the succeeding paras. As regards sale of mo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e amount of Rs. 18,000/received from Ms Srijoni for donation to CRY and for advertisement, appear to be afterthought. First of all, it is not explained as to what was to need for making payment on behalf of another person and then taking cash. Secondly, when the other person was herself doing some business, there was no reason to make payment through the assessee. Hence assessee's explanation are not acceptable. In view of the facts mentioned above, it appears that assessee's explanation regarding deposit of Rs. 3,06,150/ is not genuine and it is only an afterthought to justify these cash deposits in his bank account. Hence assessee's contentions are rejected and addition of Rs. 3,06,150/ is confirmed. 3.2 Grounds of Appeal No.2 In the Kotak Mahindra Bank A/c. cash deposit of Rs. 18,11,765/was made. Assessee had explained these deposits from 2(two) sources. Rs. 2,00,000/was claimed to have been received as consultancy fee and the balance was claimed to have been received as sale proceeds from wife's business. In the appeal proceedings, AI R has submitted that assessee's wife Smt. Arpita Chatterjee is the joint holder of this account an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me was rightly rejected as an afterthought. Even the amount of Rs. 72,650/- claimed to be received by the assessee from his mother-in-law for payment of the air ticket and hotel booking was found to be unacceptable due to several flaws pointed out by the AO. As mentioned by Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order, the mother-in-law of the assessee was doing her independent business and was having her own bank account and the alleged payment was made by her to the assessee almost one year after the journey performed. On the same ground, the claim of the assessee of having received a sum of Rs. 49,000/- from his wife for payment of credit cards expenses was not found acceptable by the authorities below. Keeping in view these cogent and convincing reasons given by the authorities below, we are of the view that the source of deposits found to be made in his bank account with HDFC Bank as explained by the assessee to the extent of Rs. 3,06,150/- was rightly rejected by the authorities below. In that view of the matter, we find no justifiable reason to interfere with the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition made by the AO on this issue and dismiss Ground No.2 of the assessee's a....