2025 (11) TMI 1048

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....irming the addition of Rs. 60,11,000/- as made by the Assessing Officer and also confirming the action of the Ld. AO in taxing the amount of Rs. 60,11,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s provisions of Section 115BBE. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not giving the benefit of the amount withdrawan from the same bank account in the year under consideration and also part amount in earlier years, which was re-deposited in the same bank account of the assessee, during the year consideration. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the amount so withdrawn had not been used anywhere and the said denial of the benefit of the earlier withdrawals is against the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee and sought an explanation for the source of such deposits. * The assessee duly submitted that the cash deposited during the year was out of earlier cash withdrawals made from the same bank account nearly two years back. * These withdrawals were neither spent nor utilized for any other purpose and remained available in cash with the assessee for business contingencies and operational flexibility. * Despite this explanation and availability of bank records showing both the earlier withdrawals and the subsequent deposits, the AO rejected the explanation and treated the deposits as unexplained cash credits under Section 69A of the Act. 4. During the proceedings before us, ld. Counsel for the Assessee argued at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... pronouncements, it is respectfully submitted that: * The explanation provided by the assessee is credible and substantiated with proper evidence. * No addition is warranted under Section 68/69 of the Act merely on the basis of cash deposit where the source is clearly identified. * The addition made is based on suspicion, conjecture, and surmise, without any contrary material. Further we also rely upon the following Judgments wherein it has been held that no addition can be made of the cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee if the cash withdrawn from the bank account is re deposited in the bank account where the department could not prove that cash in hand available was utilised by the assessee....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Assessee preferred an appeal before CIT(A) who has confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee argued at length and filed a written submission which has been reproduced above. 8. Per Contra, ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 9. We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. We find that both the Revenue authorities below did not accept the claim made by the Assessee. During the proceedings before us, ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Department could not bring anything on record to prove that the entire amount of Rs. 78,00,400/- which was withdr....