TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (5) TMI 1131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in setting aside the assessment order by invoking section 263 of the IT Act 1961. 3) That the Ld. CIT erred in setting aside the assessment order even without holding that the assessment so passed is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and thus was wrong in initiating the proceedings u/s 263 of the I T Act 1961. 4) That the Ld. CIT erred in completely ignoring the enquiry already made by the ld. AO by resorting to notices u/s 133(6) of the IT Act 1961 and based his conclusion that AO should resort to enquiry u/s 133(6) of the IT Act 1961 which demonstrate that the Ld. CIT was predetermined to set aside the assessment order and hence the entire proceedings u/s. 263 are bad in law. 5) That the appellant craves leave to submit additional grounds of appeal, if any, at or before the time of hearing and/or alter, modify reframe any grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing." 3. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. A perusal of the order sheet shows that there is no appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing fixed on 17.12.2019, 13.07.2020, 26.08.2020, 14.02.2022 and 22.03.2022. However, noti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....withdrawn from State Bank 6006 1,41,000/- Out of cash withdrawn from IDBI A/c No. 43838 7,20,000/- Proprietor (Mr. PR Chandak) 70,000/- Total 21,75,652/- Similarly, the break-up of source of cash deposit in IDBI account no. 43838, Sambalpur was as follows: IDBI 43838, SAMBALPUR Details of deposits 31.03.2014 Particulars Amount Cash (Collection from Debtors of SMTC) 49,23,560/- Out of cash withdrawn from State Bank of India 6006 6,92,000/- Out of cash withdrawn from Union Bank A/c No. 28064 60,000/- Proprietor (Mr. PR Chandak) 8,15,000/- Bank interest 325/- Total 64,90,885/- From the above details of cash deposits the following facts are discernible:- (a) As per the explanation of the assessee, major source of these deposits was the corresponding cash withdrawal from the respective bank accounts from time to time. There was a frequent withdrawal of cash from different bank accounts which was subsequently deposited in the bank accounts. However, no explanation was found on record as to what was the purpose of such frequent withdrawal There is no plausible reason available on r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ny further opportunity of hearing." 6. During the revisionary proceedings the assessee filed detailed reply and stated that the ld. AO has made necessary enquiries but ld. PCIT was not satisfied and he directed the AO to make necessary investigation on the above issue of source of cash deposit in bank account and pass a fresh assessment order recomputing the assessee's income. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. There is no appearance on behalf of the assessee. Ld. D/R supported the order of the ld. PCIT. 8. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Through this appeal the assessee has challenged the order u/s 263 of the Act being arbitrary, illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. From going through the show cause notice, we find that the bone of contention as observed by the ld. PCIT is regarding the source of cash deposit in savings bank account which are alleged to be more than the assessee's business turnover. As observed in the impugned order, ITS details shows that there was total cash deposit of Rs. 78,00,560/- during the year in two bank accounts held in IDBI Bank bearing Nos. 16588 & 43838. We, furthe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....drawn from account with SBI where deposits were made from customers and kept to meet the emergency requirement of funds. Rs.1,27,000/-The source of fund in IDBI bank has already been explained in above. Rs. 1,41,000/-In the SBI account, collection from debtors were received and it also contained transactions from other bank accounts. c) Source of Deposit Rs. 8 85 000/-: - The above sum does not represent any cash deposit. It represents Rs. 8,15,000/- deposited into IDBI A/c 43838 out of IDBI A/c No. 16588 by way of clearing transfer and Rs 70,000/deposited into [DBI A/e 16588 from IDBI A/e No. 43838 by way of clearing, transfer. There was no cash transfer in the above two accounts but it represents interbank transfer from one to other account. As per following details: - 1. From 16588 To 43838 Rs.80,000 on 4-7-13 2. From 16588 To 43838 Rs.1,00,000 on 17-7-13 3. From 16588 To 43838 Rs. 15,000 on 8-8-13 4. From 16588 To 43838 Rs.45,000 on 17-8-13 5. From 16588 To 43838 Rs.1,50,000 on 16-9-13 6. From 16588 To 43838 Rs. 1,00,000 on 24-9-13 7. From 16588 To 43838 Rs.75,000 on 29-11-13 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee made huge cash deposits at IDBI bank limited. Letter u/s 133(6) of the Act was issued to the bank for requisition « statement of details. Reply received from the bank appears that assessee maintained twa account and total cash deposit worth Rs. 21,25,000/- and Rs.56,75,560/- respectively. During course of proceedings the total deposit have been reconciled and found to be in order." 10. From going through the above facts, we find merit in the grounds raised by the assessee and note that the source of cash deposit in the bank account held with IDBI has been examined by the ld. AO and after being satisfied with the details has accepted the source of cash deposits. Even before ld. PCIT, the assessee has given complete details about the frequent withdrawal of cash from different bank accounts and the source of cash deposit in both the bank accounts held with IDBI Bank. Ld. PCIT failed to find any error in the details filed by the assessee. The finding of the ld. PCIT seems to be general even after the assessee has given the complete details and the source of cash deposit. It makes sense that the ld. AO was obligatory to conduct enquiries into the source of deposits by issu....