2022 (2) TMI 972

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs respectively under section 68 of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3. The assessee is an individual. She is a spinster and lives with her 86 years old father. During the previous year relevant to assessment Year 2017- 18, the assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs in cash in her Bank A/c. The source of funds for cash deposit to the extent of Rs. 22 lakhs received from assessee's father and two sisters of Rs. 13 lakhs, Rs. 4 lakhs and Rs. 5 lakhs was accepted by the AO. The AO did not accept the explanation of source of cash from Shri. Narayan Iyengar HUF (hereinafter referred to as HUF) of Rs. 3 lakhs and from Shri. Upendra, brother of the assessee of a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs. Mr Upendranath's name has been wrongl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion made should be deleted. CIT(A) without considering the aforesaid submissions merely observed that the assessee did not give supportive evidence and plausible explanations. 8. I have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee who reiterated the stand of the assessee as put forth before the CIT(A). I find that the AO disbelieved receipt of cash from the HUF on the ground that the income of HUF declared for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18 was not sufficient to prove the gift of Rs. 3 lakhs given by the HUF. The AO also mentioned that the HUF did not respond to the notice by the AO under section 133(6) of the Act which is not correct and a reply was filed by the HUF on 13.09.2019 reiterating the fact that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee did not file income tax return for AY 2014-15 and AY 2015-16 stating that her income was less than the minimum income limit required to file the return. Thus, the transaction of hand loan without income available to the assessee cannot be accepted. As the loan given could not be established, repayment of loan amount as explanation for cash deposit cannot be accepted. Further, assessee could not prove the identity of Sri Upendranath as to evidence of that person existing nor the actual details of transaction (except for photo copy of undated letter) is given. No reply was received for 133(6) issued to Sri Upendranath. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- cash deposit in her bank A/c explained as loan repayment from Sri Upendr....