TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 469
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer in taxing the income u/s 115BBE @ 77.25% by applying the duly substituted S.115BBE inserted retrospectively instead of taxing it at 35.54% as per the old provision of S.115BBE. 3. It is therefore prayed that addition made by the assessing officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted or the matter may please be set aside to the file of CIT(A). 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. Succinct facts are that assessee filed his return of income declaring total income at Rs.3,09,870/- on 29.11.2017 u/s 139(4) after due date. During the year under consideration, the assessee derived income from "salary and income from other sources". The case was selected for Limited Scrutiny in CASS for the reason "large value cash deposits during demonetization period as compared to Returned Income". Therefore notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 10.09.2018 and duly served upon the assessee. Subsequently, notice 142(1) of the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lthough, assesse was not a direct part of the beneficiary, it clearly shows that the employer group is taking care of the social and drawing needs of employee at various level as contended by the assessee. Further, the assesse has clearly stated that he is not having any immovable property. In fact, assessee stays in the house property of his brother and in the joint family, major part of his expenses including food and education of his daughters are borne by his elder brother. The Ld. Counsel also submitted written submission which is reproduced below: "I. During the year under consideration assessee is salaried employee with HK HUB Diamonds LLP and earned income from salary income & income from other sources i.e. interest from IT Refund, interest from saving bank account and dividend income. II. Copy of ITR along with computation of Income for AY.2017-18 is already submitted in our earlier submission dated 03.09.2019 via acknowledgement number 0309191539213. During the year assessee earned income from salary income & income from other sources and is thus not liable to maintain books of accounts. III. Copy of Bank Passbook is already submitted in our ear....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ash deposits stands proved and no addition in respect of cash deposits to be made to the income of assessee." 7. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the Assessing Officer, which we have already noted in our earlier para and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity. 8. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submissions put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the facts of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other material brought on record. The ld Counsel submitted before us that amount deposited in the bank account represents past withdrawal as well as past savings and it is also contended that a part of the deposit has also come from his wife's savings and estreedhan given to the assessee`s wife. That is, assessee and his wife, both are using the same saving bank account and assessee`s wife also deposited her lifelong savings in the said saving bank account during demonetization. The ld Counsel also pointed out that assessee`s wife does not have other saving bank account in her name, therefore assessee`s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the Revenue. This position was confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. reported in 267 ITR 272 wherein their Lordships examined the earlier decisions of the Apex Court with regard to binding nature of the Circular and laid down that when a circular issued by the Board remains in operation then the Revenue is bound by it and cannot be allowed to plead that it is not valid or that it is contrary to the terms of the statute. 12. Considering the above CBDT Circular, we are of the view that in assessee`s case under consideration, the assessee and his wife is having only one saving bank account wherein both deposits their past savings, therefore assessee should be allowed a blanket exemption of Rs. 5,00,000/- in view of instructions of CBDT, as the wife of the assessee did not have any other operational bank account and hence she has deposited her household savings in the same bank account of Axis bank where she is also a nominee ( Name:Janvi is mentioned in pass book at Pg 37 of the paper Book). The CBDT Instructions also clearly states that only the amount above the cut-off may require verification. Therefore, assessee i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the assessment proceedings. The assessing officer was not able to bring on record any evidence that the cash withdrawn from the banks were utilized by the assessee in excess of the amount shown by the assessee for household expenses. The assessing officer has not found that the household expenses debited in the capital account in various years were low. 14. We note that the assessee is regular in filing his Return of Income for more than nine years and has already shown his books of accounts and submitted the same to the Assessing Officer to show that he has sufficient cash balance to justify cash deposit during demonetization and hence no adverse view should be drawn in absence of any finding that the cash withdrawn is used for any unaccounted income or any unaccounted asset. Demonetization was a compulsion event and hence it has to be viewed differently from normal cash deposits. Reliance is placed on the decision of Agson Global Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT [ITA NO. 3741 to 3746/Del/2019] wherein it was held as follows: "Mere addition made on this ground that there is deviation in ratio is not proper. When the assessee had regular cash sale and deposit of cash in bank account....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nto account peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as narrated above, therefore it is made clear that instant adjudication shall not be treated as a precedent in any preceding or succeeding assessment year. 18. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order is pronounced on 18/10/2022 by placing the result on the Notice Board. ============= Document 1 Cash on Hand Sr. Income Tax Assessment Year Gross Income as on ending No. Paid of the year 1 2017-18 379821 12798 455551 2 2016-17 264593 6132 1364091 3 2015-16 366885 13228 1191764 4 2014-15 192537 0 950493 5 2013-14 237632 526 780111 9 2012-13 204146 200 575272 7 2011-12 173903 200 396150 8 2010-11 176569 490 305849 9 2009-10 171129 1010 206319 Document 2 (a cash deposit in Bank in F.Y. 2015-16 4.1 (b Total cash deposit in Bank from 01.09.2015 to 08.11.2015 (c Total cash deposit in Bank from 09.11.2015 to 31.12.2015 (a Total cash deposit in Bank in F.Y. 2016-17 4.2 (b Total cash deposit in Bank from 01.04.2016 to 08.11.2016 ....