2025 (11) TMI 1848

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or this, Assessee has raised the following Ground No. 2" " 2 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), ITD has erred both on fact and in law, in confirming the addition of Rs. 46,75,000/- made by the AO on account of cash deposits under Section 68 read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). (ii) That the above-said addition has been confirmed rejecting the detailed submissions and explanations along with the evidences brought on record by the assessee to justify the source of deposit made in the bank account." 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 46.75 Lacs in his Bank account with Bank of Baroda during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer required the Assessee to explain the source of these cash deposits. The Assessing Officer after noticing from the Bank statement of the Assessee procured under section 133(6) of the Act that the Assessee has deposited cash during demonetization period three or four times. The AO noted that out of this Rs. 46.75 Lacs, the Assessee has deposited Rs. 11 Lacs during the period 07.04.2016 to 09.06.2016 and balance of Rs. 35.75 Lacs dur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....High Court held that- 5. Further, the deposits in Bank were made after a gap of two-three instances of withdrawals. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal concurred with the findings recorded by the CIT(A) that the withdrawals were for the purpose of business and not available for redeposit. Further, the withdrawals were re-deposited after a gap of two or three months which was not probable. Thus, the assessee was not able to link the cash withdrawn from the bank with the cash deposit. (Emphasis supplied) In the appellant's case, the deposits into the bank account are more than one year apart from its first withdrawal of cash from bank account, which is claimed to be the source of the said deposit by the appellant. Therefore, in the absence of any documentary evidence to back the claim made by the appellant, it cannot be accepted that the said withdrawals were made by him on account of any legal dispute related to his family business. As such, the ground of appeal raised by the appellant is dismissed. " 4. Aggrieved, Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Assessee before us now has explained that this amount of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owance of claim of exemption of indexation cost of construction for an amount of Rs. 1,09,54,020/- while computing the same under the head 'capital gain'. For this, Assessee has raised the following grounds vide Ground No. 3. "3 (i) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), ITD has erred both on fact and in law, in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 1,09,54,020/- made by the AO on account of indexed cost of construction claimed by the assessee while computing the income under the head capital gain. (ii) That the above-said disallowance has been confirmed rejecting the submissions and explanations along with the evidences brought on record by the assessee to justify the cost of improvement claimed by the assessee." 8. Brief facts of this issue are that the Assessee while computing capital gains arising out of sale of property claiming indexed cost of acquisition for an amount of Rs. 1,53,43,003/-. The AO during the assessment of crossproceedings asked the Assessee to submit the details for the claim, but Assessee could not submit any detail and, hence, he disallowed the claim of addition/improvement cost and consequent indexation while comp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owable in the hands of the appellant to be claimed against total sale consideration of Rs. 6,47,50,000/-. Therefore, the ground of appeal raised by the appellant is party allowed. " Aggrieved, Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the Assessee filed a Chart showing computation of indexation cost of assessment for land at Village Mokarabpur, land at Village Udhamgarh and also filed confirmation from the buyers in respect of sale of property that on this property it was fenced by boundary wall and land filling was done. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated for this, the Assessee has incurred the following expenses year wise: Sr. No Land at Land filling and boundary wall expenses (Rs. ) Incurred in F.Y. Index Chart Index Cost (Rs. ) 01 Village Mokarabpur [Area (9k + 11m)] 20,06,000 2014-15 1125/1024 22,03,857 02 Village Udhamgarh [Area (16k 5m + 6s] 22,01,000 2013-14 1125/939 26,36,981 7,99,500 2014-15 1125/1024 8,78,357 11,25,000 2016-17 1125/1125 11,25,000 03 Vi....