TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 54
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Thereafter, a questionnaire u/s 142(1) dated 28/7/2014 was served on the assessee. In response to the notices issued to the assessee, C.A and AR of the assessee attended and submitted the details called for. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee derived income from salary and income from other sources. No other sources of income as admitted. During the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Shri Raman Singh Siddhu, husband of the assessee stated that he does not possess statement of his account in HSBC Bank, Geneva. During the search of lockers in HSBC in Gurgaon and Delhi maintained by the assessee in joint with her husband Shri Raman Singh Siddhu, cash amounting to Rs. 13 lacs was found. Statement of Shri Raman Singh Siddhu was recorded on 23/8/2011, u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, wherein specific questionnaire regarding the availability of the cash in lockers maintained by him was asked. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 13 lacs towards the cash found in locker and treated the same as unaccounted income of the assessee, u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer also made addition in respect of credit entries totali....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s India (P) Ltd. Her Husband is CA-MBA and has working experience of more than 36 years. He worked in Grind-lays Bank, Barclays Bank and in HSBC Securities and Investment (P) Ltd. as Sr. Director. It is worth mentioning that the family of the assessee comprises of Self, Husband and School Going daughter. The son resides abroad for studies. Hence, keeping in view the cash balance available with the family and aforesaid facts, the addition on account of estimation/ mere rejection without assigning reason is completely unjustified. The Ld. AR relied upon the decisions in case of Anand Prakash Soni vs. DCIT {101 TTJ 0097} [Jodh], DCIT vs. Vishwanath Prasad Gupta {57 DTR 0089}[Jab Trib], Ashwani Kumar vs. ITO {39 ITD 0183}[Del Trib], Ashok Chaddha vs. ITO {69 DTR 0082} [Del], Yadu Hari Dalmia vs. CIT{126 ITR 0048} [Del], CIT vs. Pagariya Nandakishore Suwalaji {79 CCH 0519} [Kar HC], CIT & ANR. vs. S.N. Murali Mohan {320 ITR 0144} [Kar HC], Harbans Lai Gupta vs. ITO {37 TTJ 0636}[Del Trib], JCIT vs. Budh Kishore {90 TTJ 0410} [Del Trib], ITO vs. Karan Mehra {40 CCH 0458} [Del Trib]. 5. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer and the order of the CIT(A). 6. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ced in due course. 4.2 During the search of locker no. E-722, HSBC Bank, South Ext., New Delhi maintained in the name of assessee in joint name with Shri Raman Singh Sidhu, cash amounting to Rs. 50,000/- was found. At the time of the search of this locker, statement of the assessee- Smt. Rupinder Dhanoa Sidhu was recorded: The relevant part of the statement of Smt Rupmder Dhanoa Sidhu dated 07./0.207/ is reproduced as under:- "Q: 3 On searching the locker no. E-722, the following items have been found: i) Gold jewellery weighing 8 71.400gm worth Rs. 23,45,016/- (as per valuation report dated 12.10.2011. ii) Cash amounting to Rs. 50,000/-. Please explain the source of above. Ans. ............. Further I want to state that the cash of Rs. 50,000/- is received as Shagun on auspicious occasions ". 4.3 From the statements of Shri Raman Singh Sidhu as well as of Smt Rupinder Dhanoa Sidhu, as reproduced above, it is clear established beyond any iota of doubt that cash found in the lockers belonged to Mrs. 7?wpm^7er Dhanoa Sidhu only. Vide notice u/s 142(1) dated 15.12.2014, the assessee was asked "Cash of Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the assessee is liable for penalty proceedings u/s 271 AAA of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 with regards to the addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- as detaiful above, and accordingly penalty proceedings are being initiated separately by the issue of notice u/s 274 of the Act. " During the appellate proceedings, Ld. A.R. has filed written submission vide letter 15.6.2015, which is reproduced as under:- 'GROUND NO.l The learned DCIT has made addition of Rs. 1300000 on account of Cash found in Lockers during the search. He has based his decision to make the addition on the statement of the assessee recorded during the search where in the assessee has asserted that the cash found in lockers represented her savings over the years out of cash withdrawn. The assessee had vide her letter dated 26th Dec. 2014 given detailed justification of cash found. The assessee had attached the details of cash withdrawn during the last seven assessment years from the bank account of the assessee held jointly with her husband and utilization of the same giving the cash in hand at the end of each year. A copy of the reply of the assessee is enclosed for your ready reference with the cash....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gs, the appellant has reiterated more or less same argument; which were taken before the A.O., in the assessment proceedings. It has also been submitted that the bank accounts from where cash has been withdrawn, are the accounts in the join name of the appellant and her husband and therefore, cash found represent the cash in the hands of both of them as a family. However, in the statement, her husband Shri Raman Singi Sidhu, has stated that the cash found from the lockers belong to his wife and mother-in-law, and therefore, the argument of the appellant that the withdrawal from the joint bank accounts represents the cash in the hands of both of them as the family. From the above, the following facts emerges: (a) Cash of Rs. 1 to 2 lacs belongs to the mother of the appellant, as stated by Shri Raman Singh Sidhu in the statement recorded u/s 132(4). However, the appellant has denied about the cash belonging to her mother, out of the cash found from the lockers and the appellant has owned up the cash found from both the lockers, as belonging to her only. Therefore, I hold that no cash out of Rs. 13,00,000/-, belongs to the mother of the appellant. (b) From the joint ....