2025 (9) TMI 847

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1 dated 31.03.2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by ITO, Ward-41(2), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'ld. AO'). 2. Though the assessee has raised several grounds before me, the only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld JCIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,89,500/- made on account of cash deposit in Canara Bank Account as unexplained money u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee is an individual having retired from State Govt. Service in Education Department deriving income from pension. The return of income for AY 2017-18 was file....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s being carried out and disbelieved the sale proceeds of glass bangles as a source for making the cash deposits. The ld AO accordingly completely ignored the second return filed by the assessee on 11.02.2019 offering additional income and proceeded to complete the assessment by taking the original return of income of Rs. 2,67,040/- and added the cash deposits made in Canara Bank Account in the sum of Rs. 10,89,500/- as undisclosed income u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Act. 4. Before the ld NFAC/ JCIT(A), the assessee explained that he had two bank accounts i.e. Saving bank account No. 2167101009157 in Canara Bank and Saving Bank Account No. 10834120815 in State Bank of India and furnished details containing date wise withdrawals....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... cash withdrawals from the bank account. Hence, even if the assessee's explanation given before the ld AO that there was some sale proceeds of bangles is to be disbelieved, still I find that assessee is having sufficient cash balance as a source for making the cash deposits which is evident from the aforesaid table. I hold that onus is on the revenue to prove with cogent evidence that the cash withdrawals made by the assessee earlier were utilized by the assessee and that the same is not available as a cash source for explaining the cash deposits made in the bank account. My view is further fortified by the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of S.R. Venkataratnam Vs. CIT reported in 127 ITR 807 (Kar). 6. In view of ....