TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 967
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he "Act") pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y) 2009-10. 2. The solitary issue in the present appeal relates to addition made on account of cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee remaining unexplained. The total cash deposits amounted to Rs. 32,08,000/- which were added as being unexplained by the A.O. but were restricted to Rs. 12,83,200/- by the Ld. CIT(A) partly accepting the assessee's explanation regarding the same. It is this balance addition of Rs. 12,83,200/- on account of unexplained cash deposits, confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) which the assessee has challenged before us raising the following effective grounds: 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming partly the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of bank account maintained by the appellant and furnished in the paper book, there was opening balance of Rs. 4,177/- and the appellant deposited cash of Rs. 4,00,000/- during the period 04.04.1008 to 08.04.2008, Then he withdrew the amounts on 8.04.2008 (Rs. 50,000/- the date on which the cash of Rs. 50,000/- was deposited) and Rs. 1,90,000/- on 11.04.2008 and further amount of Rs. 10,000/- on 14.04.2008. Then, on the next date i.e. 15.04.2008, he deposited the cash of Rs. 1,20,000/- and withdrawn Rs. 80,000/- within 4 days. Thus, this frequent withdrawals and cash deposited continued throughout the year. The total credits in this bank has been reported at Rs. 55,13,218. 01. including nominal bank interest of Rs. 1,938/- as identified by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndings of two different Assessing Officers can be relied upon as the former Assessing Officer had decided the issue for the reason of appellant's non-compliance of various notices whereas the latter assessment order was completed after considering the submissions in the case of appellant and there might be a contention raised before that Assessing Officer that the unexplained cash had already been taxed in the case of appellant. Therefore, the contentions raised in this regard cannot be accepted. 6.5............................ 6.6....................... 6.7 Considering all these facts, it would be most fair and reasonable to tax 40% of the cash deposited of Rs. 32,08,000/- in the said bank account as unexplai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one. (v) that in any case the cash withdrawals from the account far exceeded cash deposited, being 45,95,940/- as against deposits of 32,08,000/- and the deposits therefore could be entirely attributable to the withdrawals. (vi) that the Ld. CIT(A) while restricting the addition to 40% of the cash deposited had stated the reason for the same as 60% of the withdrawals being reasonably sufficient for utilizing in his business and personal purposes. Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that by this logic since the withdrawals by cheque of the assessee far exceeded his business expenses attributable in his case even as per the Section 44AD of the Act, the entire cash withdrawn was available for redeposit. 5. In this regar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....statement above: 20,40,240 6. Ld. DR however supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties. It is an undisputed fact that the bank account in which the cash was deposited was a joint account of the assessee with his father. That both were in the business of contractors and had returned income on presumptive basis u/s. 44AD of the Act @ 8% net profit on business receipts of Rs. 6,15,250/- and Rs. 15,56,338/- respectively, which has been accepted in scrutiny assessment by the Revenue. Ld. DR was unable to controvert the above facts before us. 7.1. Considering the aforesaid facts, we fail to understand how the entire cash deposited has been/could be attributable to that belonging to the assessee alone par....