TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 662
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d law. 2. The ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in not considering an amount of Rs.493984/- which was invested out of the saving of the appellant and her family members. 3. The lower authorities has grossly erred in making / confirming an addition of Rs. 493984/- without bringing any material on record to prove that the appellant has earned this amount from undisclosed sources and this amount was not accumulated from past savings of the appellant and her family members. 4. That the assessment order passed/confirmed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, illegal, illogical, unreasonable, and unwarranted with considering the facts and circumstances of the case and law on the point. 5. That the appellant craves ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eld that the availability of cash in hand of Rs, 3 lakhs stands explained. Source of investment in purchase of land to the extent of Rs. 3 lakhs is further accepted. Regarding the remaining amount of investment of Rs.5,93,984/-, (Rs. 8,93,984/- Rs. 3,00,000/-) , no explanation has been furnished by the appellant apart from stating that it was out of the past savings of the family members kept as cash in hand/ earlier cash withdrawals. As per bank a/c statement, the appellant has withdrawn only Rs. 50,000/- from her account on 06.01.2011. The submission of the appellant that the amount was-used for purchase of fend is accepted. Source of investment in purchase of land to the extent of Rs.50,000/- is accepted. Further submis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ejecting the appellant explanation that the deposit was out of the past savings of the family members kept as cash in hand/ earlier cash withdrawals without bringing on record the supporting corroborative documentary evidence to disprove the claim of the appellant. 8. In case of Smt. Uma Agrawal Vs. ITO-1(3), Gwalior [2021] 127 taxmann.com 735 (Agra - Trib.) ITAT Agra Bench has noted that Assessing Officer had not brought on record any document, evidence etc. to show that amount deposited in account by assessee was her undisclosed income arising from business or any other source. Assessee had duly explained source of deposit i.e her previous year savings. Thus, on facts, the Tribunal observed that said amount in question deposited by ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arious activities undertaken by her for and on behalf of family in last many years . Further as mentioned herein above, in the decision of Kirti (supra), women per say cannot be said to be not having income from any activities, as they are presumed to always been doing economic activities in the family for many years, hence in our view the assessee had duly explained the source of her investment. Therefore no additions can be made by lower authority. Further even if we ignore the explanation, for the sake of argument, then also it is for the assessing officer to bring on record some cogent evidence to prove that the amount deposited in the bank was undisclosed income arising from the business or from any other activities. No evidence has be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld be treated as income or not under section 69 has to be considered in the light of the facts of each case. In other words, a discretion has been conferred on the ITO under section 69 to treat the source of investment as the income of the assessee if the explanation offered by the assessee is not found satisfactory and the said discretion has to be exercised keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the particular case. 4. In the instant case, the Tribunal has held that the discretion had not been properly exercised by the ITO and the AAC in taking into account the circumstances in which the assessee was placed and the Tribunal has found that the sources of investments could not be treated as income of the assessee. The High....