2026 (2) TMI 765

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The Assessee is aggrieved and challenged appellate order as per grounds of appeal. The addition on account of gift received of Rs. 7,42,000/-, addition on account of professional receipts of Rs. 2,20,226/- and further addition on account of cash drawings from the partnership firm amounting to Rs. 5,40,000/-. 4. Briefly stated the facts show that Assessee filed a return of income on 01.01.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 9,68,540/-. 5. The Principal Director of Investigation, Bangalore received information from Halasuru Gate Police Station, Bangalore on 30.08.2019 that there is a cash seizure of Rs. 78,00,000/-. Pursuant to that, survey u/s. 133A was carried out on 06.09.2019 at the business of Shri Ashish Agarwal at Bangalore. The facts show that one Mr. Pramod Kumar Katakura at Bangalore filed a police complaint on 26.08.2019 regarding bag snatching containing cash of Rs. 78,00,000/- and a FIR was lodged. Summons u/s. 131 was issued to Mr. Pramod Kumar who stated that the cash does not belong to him, but money belongs to one Smt. Shanti Devi along with Shri Ashish Agarwal, Shri Bishnu Kumar Agarwal, Smt. Sachi Agarwal and Smt. Gauri Kumari (Assessee). Based on the sur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....20,226/-. Further, during the assessment proceedings, same were found to be Rs. 2,19,300/- only. Thus, the professional fee received in cash was also not accepted. (iv) The sum of Rs. 5,40,000/- which was stated to be withdrawn in cash from M/s. Bishnu Kumar Agarwal & Company where Assessee is a partner was also not accepted because the purpose for which the money was withdrawn by the firm and the cash in hand of the firm was not provided for. 8. Accordingly, the Ld. Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 23,00,000/- as unexplained money by passing an Assessment Order on 29.09.2022. 9. The Assessee challenged the same before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) accepted the claim of the opening balance of cash in hand of Rs. 7,97,774/-. Further, he did not accept the amount of gift received of Rs. 4,40,000/- from the near relatives. The Ld. CIT(A) also did not believe that Assessee has received cash fees of Rs. 2,20,226/- and therefore the addition was confirmed.The Ld. CIT(A) with respect to the cash withdrawn from the firm did not accept and confirmed the addition. Therefore, the Assessee is in appeal. 10. The Assessee along with her Chartered Accountant Shri Shiva....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee is also having the PAN number regularly assessed to tax have confirmed gift to the Assessee. Similarly, the brother in law and sister in law also confirmed the gift to the Assessee. The Ld. lower authorities have merely rejected the gift deeds without any enquiry. It is also immaterial that when the Assessee received gift from her near relatives, the same can be disregarded on technical grounds. This cannot be the reason that as Assessee has not received any gifts in past, the gifts would not be genuine. Anyway, the Assessee would be receiving gifts at certain time in the first instance only. In view of the above facts, where the name, address, relationship, quantum of the gift and that too from the parents and near relatives is shown I have no hesitation in directing the Ld. Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 7,42,000/-. Accordingly, I allow ground no. 2 of the Appeal of the Assessee. 13. The third ground of appeal is with respect to the addition of Rs. 2,20,226/- professional receipts received in cash. The same was rejected by the Ld. lower authorities stating that such sum cannot be accepted as a professional fee received by the Assessee because there is n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....complete details of withdrawal from partnership firm were shown wherein he confirmed the addition that the above sum would have been spent on household withdrawal. I find that Assessee has submitted the details of cash withdrawal from the partnership firm where she is a partner. Undoubtedly, the revenue accepted that the above amount is withdrawn by the Assessee from the partnership firm. It is not the case of the revenue that partnership firms were not having available cash as on the date of the withdrawal. Accordingly, I have not hesitation in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,40,000/- in the hands of the Assessee which is shown by the Assessee but have been withdrawn in cash from the partnership firm where she is a partner. Accordingly, ground no. 4 of the Appeal is allowed. 15. In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed as ground no. 1 and ground no. 5 are not pressed. Hence, I dismiss those grounds. 16. In the result, Appeal is partly allowed. ITA No. 1012/Bang/2025 17. ITA No. 1012/Bang/2025 is filed by Shri Ashish Agarwal for Assessment Year 2020-21 against the Appellate Order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals - 11, Bangalore dated....