2023 (5) TMI 945

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ade by the AO u/s 68 of the Act. 3. Facts in brief are that the assessee filed return of income on 23.03.2013 declaring total income of Rs. Nil. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act after AO received information from ITO(Inv), Unit-3, Kolkata to the effect that a bank account was opened in Oriental bank of commerce ,Bikaner Ganga Sahar the name of Patra Bastralaya on 3.6.2010 which is dealing in shares and garments. It was also informed that there were cash deposits in multiple entries of just below Rs. 10 lakhs and funds were transferred to group accounts. The AO called for various information/details during the re-aassessment proceedings and framed the assessment u/s 143(3) /147 accepting the returned income of the assessee. Thereaft....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t dated . 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) simply affirmed the order of AO by observing and holding as under: "6. Findings : On considering submission made by the appellant and findings of the assessing officer it is observed that as per the Bank statements of the appellant for the period from 01/04/2010 to 31.03.2011 that cash is deposited multiple times. It is trite that the onus lies on the assessee to explain the source of the cash deposits satisfactorily. The plea of the appellant is as much as Rs. 11,00,000/- (08.06.2010 at Rs. 6,00,000/- and 14.06.2010 at Rs. 5,00,000/-) cash deposit is made in the bank account. The appellant submitted that the Ld. Assessing Officer is completing that assessment by making arbitra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s, cash receipts, and cash deposits and vis-a-vis the claim of the assessee with regard to the stated transactions, in view of the above the appeal stands dismissed. The opinion was upheld by the Hon'ble Mumataka High Court in the judgement of C K Rama Krishna vs. ITO (325 ITR 560), similar opinion was upheld by the High court of Chhattisgarh in the case of Bharat Krishna Kendra Vs. Union Of India, by the High court: of Orissa in the case of Amit Kumar Matwani Vs. Income Tax Officer . It was the ratio decidendi states that the ratio decidends clearly established that the burden of proof on unexplained deposits made in bank is on the assessee to give the satisfactorily explanation for the source. If the explanation offered by the assessed....