TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1421
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut of his explained source and further submitted that her husband has received this amount from his father Sri Govindappa. The Assessing Officer did not accept the explanation of the assessee and made an addition under Section 68 of the Act. The assessee challenged the action of the A.O. before the CIT(Appeals) and contended that the transaction of lending of Rs. 12 lakhs to Mr. Surendra Kumar has been reflected in the books of accounts of Mr. Govindappa. The assessee filed the details of the advance given by Mr. Govindappa. The said evidence was forwarded by the CIT (Appeals) to Assessing Officer for report in the remand report, the Assessing Officer has again submitted that the evidence and explanation is not sufficient to prove that Mr. Govindappa has lent Rs. 12 lakhs to Mr. Surendra Kumar. The Assessing Officer doubted the veracity of the evidence and stated that it is fabricated. The CIT (Appeals) accordingly confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 3. Before the Tribunal, the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has duly shown the source of this cash deposit as the said amount was reflected in the balance sheet of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid amount has given the same to husband of the assessee Mr. Surendra Kumar. The Assessing Officer has taken objection that statement of account of Mr. Govindappa in the books of accounts of Mr. Surendra Kumar was not produced during the scrutiny proceedings. The Assessing Officer instead of conducting further enquiry to verify the genuineness of the transaction has denied the claim and explanation of the assessee on technical reasons. Further since all the parties are related to each other therefore, the authorities below doubted the genuineness of the transaction. Even otherwise, when the accounts in which this cash was found deposited is in the joint name of assessee and Mr. Surendra Kumar then explanation of the assessee that this amount belongs to her husband cannot be brushed aside without proper inquiry. Thus in view of the fact that the creditor though relative of the assessee accepted the transaction of advance of Rs. 12 lakhs then in the absence of conducting a proper enquiry of disproving the claim of the assessee the said explanation cannot be rejected on technical reasons. 6. Further there is no dispute that this is a transaction of deposit in the bank therefore the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... his instruction. The relevant observations of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court are extracted hereunder:- "In Baladin Ram v. CIT [1969] 71 ITR 427, it has been held by the Supreme Court that it is now well settled that the only possible way in which income from an undisclosed source can be assessed or reassessed is to make the assessment on the basis that the previous year for such an income would be the ordinary financial year. Even under the provisions embodied in s.68 of the said Act it is only when any amount is found credited in the books of the assessee for any previous year that the section will apply and the amount so credited may be charged to tax as the income of that previous year, if the assessee offers no explanation or the explanation offered by him is not satisfactory. As the Tribunal has pointed out, it is fairly well settled that when moneys are deposited in a bank, the relationship that is constituted between the banker and the customer is one of debtor and creditor and not of trustee and beneficiary. Applying this principle, the pass book supplied by the bank to its constituent is only a copy of the constituent's account in the books mainta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Though we are of the view that provisions of section 68 of the Act cannot be invoked on the deposits made in the bank account of the assessee, yet we have examined the veracity of the additions made by the Assessing Officer on certain deposits by invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act and we find that before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has furnished reasonable and plausible explanations along with confirmation with regard to the different deposits. Since the ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue on merit also in the light of the explanations and confirmations placed before him, in a proper perspective and we find no infirmity therein, we confirm the same. Accordingly, finding no merit in the Revenue's appeal, we dismiss the same. In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee are dismissed. 12. Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Kamal Kumar mishraa (supra), we allow the appeal of the assessee." A similar view has been taken by the Delhi Bench of Tribunal in the case of Vijendra Kumar Vs. ITO (supra) in paras 7 & 8 as under : 7. As regards the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court ....