TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 1343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A.R did not press the grounds numbered as 2 & 3 relating to validity of reopening of assessment. Accordingly, both the grounds are dismissed as not pressed. The remaining grounds relate to the addition relating to cash deposits sustained by Ld CIT(A). 3. The assessee along with two other persons named Sri K Sai Prasad and Sri V Venkatramanan has maintained a joint bank account with Bank of India. During the year under consideration, a sum of Rs. 20,39,000/- was found deposited into this bank account. The assessee could not explain the sources of the deposits so made. However, he claimed before the AO only 1/3rd deposit belong to him. However, the AO completed the assessment by making addition of Rs. 20,39,000/-. 4. It is pertinent to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....basis of the facts in the case under consideration. For AY 2011-12, the ITAT has decided regarding peak credits on the basis of facts relevant to that year. However for the year under consideration, there is nothing on record to suggest that all the withdrawals made from the bank account were re-deposited in the bank account. A perusal of the withdrawal from bank account shows that an amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- withdrawn on 27.09.2007 was paid by cheque to Sh V Vaidyanathan (may be the appellant himself) and the same was not a cash withdrawal. Further Rs. 3,75,000/- withdrawn on 20.12.2007, Rs. 2,75,000/- withdrawn on 28.01.2008, Rs. 2,50,000/- withdrawn on 05.02.2008 are not cash withdrawals but payments made by cheque for making fixed depos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000/- on 27.09.2007 by using cheque and hence the Ld CIT(A) was not justified in not giving credit of the same. With regard to the withdrawals made on 20.12.2007, 28.01.2008 and 05-02-2008, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has not taken these three withdrawals as cash withdrawal in the Peak Credit Workings. The Ld A.R invited my attention to "Peak Credit working' placed at pages 55-56 of paper book to substantiate his contentions in this regard. The withdrawal made on 27.02.2008 does not affect the peak credit working. The withdrawal of Rs. 3.00 lakhs made on 28-09-2007 has been re-deposited in various dates, which the Ld CIT(A) himself is accepting. Accordingly he submitted that the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) needs to be rejected....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee when subsequent deposits were made. In the absence of any such material, I am of the view that the assessee should be given credit of withdrawal of Rs. 3.00 lakhs made. Accordingly, the observations made by Ld CIT(A) with regard to the above said two withdrawals are also liable to be set aside. 10. Accordingly, I set aside the observations made by Ld CIT(A) in paragraph 5.4 of his order. Since the assessing officer has not verified the peak credit workings, I restore this issue to his file for the limited purpose of verifying the peak credit workings and accordingly direct the AO to assessee 1/3rd of peak credit balance in the hands of the assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7 By SB 1285 - Cash Deposit made 03.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 04.12.2007 By SB 1285 - Cash Deposit made 12.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 17.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 20.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 24.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 27.12.2007 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 29.12.2007 By SB 1285 Cash Deposit made 03.01.2008 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 03.01.2008 To SB 1285- Cash Withdrawn 07.01.2008 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 10.01.2008 By SB 1285- Cash Deposit made 11.01.2008 By SB 1285 Cash Deposit made 45,000 (1,57,000) 48,000 (2,05,000) 46,000 (2,51,000) 48,000 (2,99,000) 47,000 (3,46,000) 49,000 (3,95,000) 48....