TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 807
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....riefly stated, the Assessing Officer had noted that the cash amounting to Rs. 19,30,500/- was deposited in the bank account of the assessee at SBI, Kaithana. He further noted that despite various opportunities provided to the assessee proper explanation could not be filed of the same. Therefore, the Assessing Officer added the entire cash deposited in the bank of Rs. 19,30,500/- to the income of the assessee. 4. Before the Ld.CIT(Appeals), detailed submissions were filed by the assessee stating the source of the said cash deposits as being from agricultural income earned from ancestral agricultural land and also from the sale of trees on the said land and further from the salary received by the assessee and his wife in cash from a college....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficate from the college where the assessee and his wife were lecturers had been filed certifying the receipt of salary in cash. The Ld. counsel for assessee also pointed out that it was stated before both the lower authorities that the assessee belonged to an agriculturist family and his father Shri Sita Ram S/o Shri Gorkha Ram was the owner of 108.5 kanal of land at village Songri, Tehsil Rajaund and further due to old age and illness of his father he had been given the responsibility to look after the affairs of his father's agricultural land since his other two brothers were settled in Indore while the assessee was the only son staying with his father. It was also stated that the land was given on lease for cultivating to Shri Balwan Sin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sustainable and needed to be deleted. 8. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals). 9. We have heard the rival contentions. We agree with the contention of the Ld. counsel for assessee that the Ld.CIT(Appeals) has upheld the addition made without giving any basis that too after necessary evidences were filed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), we find, has passed a cryptic order merely stating that the evidences filed by the assessee were not sufficient to explain the large cash deposits made by the assessee without pointing out the insufficiency in the evidences filed. We find that the assessee had demonstrated that he was earning salary alongwith his wife amounting in all to Rs. 2,26,680/- and Rs. 2,23,20....