TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1673
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal is against the confirmation of addition by the ld. CIT (A) of Rs.1,70,63,000/- as made by the ld. AO u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposit. 03. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 26.10.2017, declaring income of Rs.9,17,340/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny through Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS) on account of large cash deposits and abnormal increase in sales with decrease in profitability. Accordingly, notice u/s 143(2) and 143(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued calling for various documents/ evidences from the assessee to prove the source of cash deposits. The ld. AO noted that during the course of assessment proceedings, the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filing including the bank account statement showing the withdrawals of cash made from the bank account and also audited financial statements, ITR, tax audited report, summary of data wise cash withdrawals from the bank account and explanation of cash deposited into the bank accounts by explaining the source out of cash in hand, which was accumulated out of cash withdrawals. The ld. CIT (A) referred the matter to the ld. AO for examination and verification by calling of remand report which was submitted on 07.03.2025. The ld. CIT (A) after taking into account the remand report dismissed the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact that JAO has accepted the source of cash deposits into the bank accounts as duly explained by the assessee. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4) 169 taxmann.com 90(Amritsar) ii) Jaspal Singh Sehgal vs ITO, 47 ITR (T) 193 (Mum) iii) Ajaya Data vs ACIT (2025) 171 taxmann.com 308 (Jaipur) 06. In the case of Joginder Kaur vs ITO (2024) 169 taxmann.com 99 (Amritsar), the Co-ordinate Bench has held that where the assessee has submitted the details of cash summary showing inflow and outflow cash in the relevant year to show that cash has been withdrawn and redeposited, then the assessee was to be allowed the benefit of redeposit and the impugned addition deserved to be deleted. For the sake of brevity, the relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced as under: "12. We have heard both the counsels at length and considered all the materials on record including the paper bo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s seen that sufficient cash balance are available with the assessee on the date of deposit of cash in the bank account in the month of March 2010 and as per contention of the assessee it is the same cash that has been redeposited. We also agree with the argument of the Ld AR, that it is not the case of the department that cash withdrawn by the assessee from PNB Gramin bank, during the period April 2009 till January 2010, (as reflected in bank account) has been invested or spent somewhere else or has been utilized elsewhere. In absence of any such adverse finding, the benefit of cash availability cannot be denied to the assessee. 13. As such considering all factual circumstances, and considering the transactions of cash withdrawn fr....