TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 934
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... agriculture income at Rs. 2,60,000/-. The AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29.02.2016 which was served upon the assessee. The assessee explained that cash of Rs. 18,78,400/- was deposited in his two saving bank accounts on different dates from sale receipts of Popular trees (Agriculture Income) throughout the year. The AO did not accept the explanation of the assessee and made addition of Rs. 18,78,400/- u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Ld. Counsel for assessee referred to reasons for issue of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, copy of which is filed at page 4 of the PB and is reproduced as under: - Reasons for issue of Notice u/s 148 Neel Kant Chaudhary, Chaudhary Nursing Home, Shahpur M. Nagar AY 2012-13 As per AIR information available in this office that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 17,69,000/- in his saving bank account in ING Vysya Bank Ltd. at Muzaffarnagar. To verify the transaction verification letter dated 18.08.2015 was issued to the assessee regarding source of cash deposit in his bank account. The assessee has filed reply dated 07.12.2015 but the assessee neither properly explained the source of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.6701/Del./2019 Assessment Year 2011-2012 Shri Dheeraj Yadav, K1-31, New Palam Vihar, Gurgaon. Haryana PIN - 122 001. PAN AAYPY2157N vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-46(5), New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Shantanu Jain, Advocate For Revenue : Mr. Sri Prakash Dubey, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 23.12.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 01.01.2021 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi, Dated 28.05.2019, for the A.Y. 2011-2012, challenging the reopening of the assessment under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and addition of Rs. 11,07,160/-. 2. We have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties through video conferencing and perused the material on record. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that proceedings under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was initiated on the basis of information that assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 11,07,160/- with ICICI Bank and al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 11,09,693/- on account of cash deposit in bank and commission payments received by the assessee during the year chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Since, four years have lapsed but not more than six years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, It is therefore, proposed as per the provisions of section 149(1) (b) read with section 151(3) of the I.T Act, 1961 that approval for initiating action u/s 147 of income tax Act, 1961 may be granted in the case. It is pertinent to mention here that in this case the assessee has chosen not to file return of income for the year under consideration although the total income of the assessee had exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax as discussed in paragraph 4 above and the assessee was assessable under the Act. In view of the above, the provisions of clause (a) of Explanation 2 to section 147 are applicable to facts of this case and the assessment year under consideration is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In this case, more than four years but not more than six years have elapsed from the' end of the relevant assessment year. He....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, it was treated as unexplained deposit under section 69A of the I.T. Act and made the addition of Rs. 14,75,000. 3. The assessee challenged the above addition before Ld. CIT(A) and it was submitted that assessee is Maulvi for Arabic Religious and Teacher and teaching Arabic in the Masjid. He has prestige in the society and trustworthy in the community. People coming to him for pious purposes, giving money for safe deposit and take back whenever required. The assessee deposited the amount in bank account which was later on withdrawn and returned to them. Assessee gets salary from Waqf Board, Delhi. 4. At the appellate stage, assessee was asked to produce lenders for their statements. The assessee produced some of the persons at the appellate stage. Their statements were recorded in which they have confirmed to have given amounts to the assessee. Ld. CIT(A), however, do not accept the contention of assessee because lenders are not having enough money and that they themselves have bank account, therefore, there were no reason to deposit amount in the bank account of the assessee. Appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. 5. The assessee in the pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly, quashed the reopening of the assessment. The findings of the Tribunal in para 8 of the Order are reproduced as under: "8. In this case the Assessing Officer after obtaining the AIR information wanted to verify the same and issued a letter of enquiry to the assessee. The Assessing Officer thus did not apply his independent mind to the information received from AIR. Since no proceedings were pending before the Assessing Officer when he issued a letter of enquiry to the assessee, therefore, such enquiry letter was not valid in eyes of law. Therefore, the assessee was not required to respond to invalid letter of enquiry issued by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer in the absence of reply of the assessee presumed that cash deposited in the bank account has escaped assessment. The deposit in the bank account per se cannot be income of the assessee. It is mere suspicion of the Assessing Officer based on incorrect fact that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The issue is therefore covered in favour of assessee by order of ITAT SMC Delhi Bench in the case of Tajendra Kumar Ghai (supra). In view of this matter, I am of the view that the Assessing Officer ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....explained that A.O. has wrongly assumed that entire cash deposited in the ICICI Bank account was income of the assessee as there are deposits and withdrawals multiple times throughout the year for business purposes. It was also explained that assessee in the business during the relevant year because assessee deals in Hardware, Sanitary and Sanitary-ware at Chawdi Bazar, Delhi. These facts clearly show that total cash deposited in the Bank Account of the assessee with ICICI Bank Ltd., per se may not be the income of the assessee. The ITAT, Delhi Bench in the case of Shri Abrar Ahmad Qasimi, Delhi vs., ITO, Ward-46(5), New Delhi (supra), following other decisions of the Tribunal has held that deposits in the bank account per se cannot be the income of the assessee. Thus, it was a mere suspicion of the A.O. based on incorrect facts that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Further, Learned Counsel for the Assessee has filed details of the deposits in ICICI Bank to show that there are cash deposits in ICICI Bank at Rs. 11,49,750/- as against Rs. 11,07,160/- stated by the A.O. in the reasons for reopening of the assessment. Thus, wrong and incorrect facts are also recorded i....