TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (3) TMI 40
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the assessee to furnish the details explaining the source for cash deposit made into the Axis Bank account and also as to why his cash receipts are high during the period April to October 2016 as compared to the same period in the earlier year. The assessee submitted that the amount of cash deposited is derived from the consultancy charges from patients which the assessee provides through private clinic of the assessee. The assessee also submitted that he has retired from his fulltime employment with Jayadeva Hospital and started dedicating more time for private practise practice during the FY 2016-17 and the cash collected from patients towards consultancy charges were accumulated and deposited in the Axis Bank. The AO did not accept the submissions of the assessee and proceeded to treat the amount deposited into Axis Bank account for a sum of Rs.33,35,000 as unexplained credit u/s. 68 and applied the rate of tax on the said amount u/s.115BBE. The relevant extract of the AO's order is as given below. "8. I have considered the submissions of the assessee. However, I do not find it acceptable. The assessee's claim that he had retired from Jayadeva Hospitals during the y....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The assessee accordingly submitted that based on these evidence, it is clear that the source for the cash deposited is from the consultancy fees collected from the patients and as on the date of demonetisation, the assessee had an accumulated balance of Rs.35,52,885 from the fees collected. Therefore the assessee submitted that the addition u/s. 68 by the AO is not correct. Without prejudice, the assessee also submitted that since the consultancy fees collected has already been offered to tax business income the same cannot be added again u/s. 68 which would amount to double taxation. 5. The CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee, gave partial relief to the extent of Rs.17 lakhs and sustained the balance addition of Rs.18,35,000 by holding as under:- "6. Ground no. 1 to 4 of the appeal are against addition of Rs.33,35,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposits. Before the AO the appellant stated that he retired from Jaydeva Hospital during FY 2016-17 and started private practice, receipts of the same was deposited in bank account. But AO on the basis of TDS schedule, held that the appellant had not retired from Jaydeva Hospital and could not have do....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dical practitioner and the cash deposits were made out of professional/Consultation receipts. The additions as made/confirmed are without basis and based on surmises and conjectures are to be deleted. 4. In any case, the addition of cash deposits as made/confirmed being part of professional /consultation charges which have already suffered taxation, the addition on account of bank deposits as confirmed amounts to double addition and hence the same is to be deleted. 5. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in holding the provisions of Section 115BBE of the I.T. Act, are applicable to the facts of the case and the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the same. On proper appreciation of the facts of the law, it is clear from provisions of Section 115BBE of the I.T. Act, are not applicable to the case of the appellant and therefore the computation of tax under Section 115BBE of the I.T. Act, being erroneous is to be deleted. 6. The appellant also denies the liability to pay interest levied U/s. 234B and 234C of I.T. Act, 1961. The Interest having been wrongly levied has to be deleted. 7. In view of the above and other grounds to be adduced at the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... addition is made for the deposit of SBN during demonetization period by the AO on the ground that it would not have been humanly possible for the assessee to provide consultancy to patients when he is in full employment. The reason for AO not to be satisfied with the explanation of the assessee is based on incorrect fact that the assessee was in full time employment with Jayadeva throughout the year and also on the basis that he had other professional receipts. We notice from the perusal of records that the assessee has retired from full time services effective 01.08.2016 and this fact has been substantiated by producing the letter from the hospital where assessee was employed fulltime and that he retired from services on 01.08.2016 and also from Form 26AS. The CIT(A) while confirming the addition partially has done so for the reason that there has not been adequate withdrawals for personal expenses. However it is noticed that the revenue has not recorded any adverse factual finding with regard to the source for the cash deposited whereas the source for impugned addition is adequately evidenced by the assessee by way of patient wise list of daily receipt from consultation in order....