TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1816
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ground Nos. 1 & 2 are general in nature and therefore, no separate adjudication is called for. 4. Regarding Ground Nos.3 & 4, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that on page No.11 of the Paper Book, a copy of bank statement for the relevant period is placed and from the same, it can be seen that the amount of Rs.25.84 lakhs was withdrawn on 10.12.2011 by way of cash withdrawal and not by way of clearing and the AO got confused by understanding the nomenclature in the column description against the same amount which was deposited in the City Bank Account for which he stated that there was credit entry in the bank statement by clearing. He drawn my attention to page No.13 of the Paper Book and pointed out that the bank statem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....& 4 are allowed. 7. Regarding Ground Nos.5, 6 & 7, it was submitted by learned Authorised Representative of the assessee that copy of the bank statement for the relevant assessment year is available at Page No.17 of Paper Book and as the bank account, there is a cash deposit of Rs.2 lakhs in the bank on 17.2.2011. He also submitted before the learned CIT (Appeals) that this cash deposit in bank is out of Rs.6 lakhs cash received by the assessee from Ms. Swati. In this regard, my attention is drawn to page No.2 of the assessment order also where the Assessing Officer noted that Ms. Swati was examined by the Assessing Officer and it was stated by her that she had refunded back to the assessee the amount of Rs.6.50 lakhs in cash in two inst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e same date on this basis that cheque returned because of insufficient funds and assessee's submission is this that cheque of Rs.2 lakhs was received from Ms. Swati and it was deposited and the same was dishonored and cash was received against such dishonor of cheque. Accordingly Ground Nos.5, 6 & 7 are also allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on the 8th day of June, 2018. ============= Document 1 1. The Order of the learned CIT(A) (3) Bangalore, is opposed to the facts and nature of case on hand. 2. The learned CIT(A)(3), erred on law and facts of the case, not providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Appellant. 3. The learned CIT (A)(3), erre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... bank account (jointly with H Lakshmi) with Canara Bank on 13.01.2011 is by way of a cash deposit whereas the withdrawals from another bank account of appellant (jointly with Srinivas B and Sailaja B) with Canara Bank on 10.01.2011 amounting to Rs. 25,85,000/- is by way of clearing of a cheque. So the submissions of the appellant that the amount was withdrawn from one account with Canara Bank and deposited in another bank account with Canara Bank, is without any merit. Further, the above submissions just appears to be an afterthought as against the earlier claim made during the assessment proceedings (vide letter dt 16.01.2014 to the AO) that the amount was deposited out of the earnings of his wife given as loan to v....