TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 990
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the circumstances of the case. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the appellant has been just the name holder and the bank account has been operated by her husband which was also accepted by the Assessing Officer. 3. My husband, Mr. Shankar was promoted as manager in Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd, Shevapet Branch, Salem and he was fixed a target for fixed deposits. He has mobilized funds from few existing customers of the bank, friends and relatives. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated when it is claimed that the assessee could not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment year 2015-16 admitting a total income of Rs. 2,25,000/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS noticing large cash deposits in savings bank account of the assessee. Consequently, a notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter "the Act"] dated 22-06-2017 was issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee, her husband Sri Shankar and authorized representative Shri A. Srinivasan, C.A. appeared. The assessee submitted before the Learned Assessing Officer [AO] that the bank account wherein cash deposits of Rs. 87,59,057/- were made was in her name but the account was actually operated by her husband. The assessee vide written submission dated 22-11-2017 submitted that whatever statements mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the known customers of the bank and deposited that borrowed fund in his wife's account in order to meet the targets of the Bank. It was also claimed by him that, after the end of the month the said borrowed funds were withdrawn and returned back to the said customers of the bank in cash. The Ld. AO sought details/evidence of such customers from the husband of the assessee. The husband of the assessee replied that he is not having any evidences regarding borrowing and depositing that fund in his wife's account. The husband of the assessee, however, replied that funds totaling Rs. 23,00,000/- were withdrawn and returned back to the customers who given the funds. Rest of the funds transferred to the accounts as directed by the customers in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case. No evidence in support of the claim was furnished before the lower authorities. Thus, the Ld. DR is in support of the order of the lower authorities. 8. We have carefully considered the submissions of the parties and materials available on record. The assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) furnished written submissions, copy of bank account and a list of names of persons mentioning their PAN Nos and amount of cash deposited in Fixed deposits in their names by the assessee's husband. The Ld. CIT(A) sought a report from the Ld. AO on the claim of the assessee. The Ld. AO, accordingly, submitted his report. The Ld. CIT(A) considered the remand report of the Ld. AO and observed as under: "In the remand report, the Assessing Officer ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mentary evidence. The Ld. CIT(A) finally came to the conclusion that the claim of the assessee that deposits were advanced by known customers unbelievable and afterthought. 10. After discussing the entire case as aforesaid, we observe that the assessee has failed to prove her claim. We observe that the assessee failed to produce the persons who deposited cash into her bank account. No evidence regarding the loan given to the husband of the assessee by the known customers of the bank so as to achieve the target of the bank were furnished by the husband of the assessee. The identity of such persons, their capacity to give loan, their sources of income etc. were not proved by the husband of the assessee before the lower authorities. The con....