TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 1762
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Revenue in its appeal has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the addition from Rs. 15,15,310/- to Rs. 9,19,797/- without appreciating the facts that the assessee had failed to prove the source of cash to pay income tax in cash during the assessment proceedings with corroborative evidences. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made of Rs. 75,48,870/- under section 69 of the Act without appreciating the facts that the assessee had failed to prove the nature of TDR made during the year of consideration as the assessee was required to prove before the Assessing Officer that there is no fresh investment in the year under consideration and the TDR noticed by the AO was reinvestment of old TDR. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the additions made of the value of the TDR and giving relief on the addition made for payment of income tax in cash by appreciating the additional evidences admitted by him and without calling for the remand repo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee was asked to furnish the source of cash utilized for payment of income tax. The assessee filed his reply dated 07.12.2019. In reply, the assessee submitted that he was having cash balance of Rs. 9,19,797/- in his personal books of account, copy of cash book of his personal capital account, balance-sheet and cash account in the books of account of M/s Bath House was furnished. The assessee also stated that he has received Rs. 6.00 lakh from his proprietary concern and paid income tax. The reply of assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer by taking view that assessee failed to furnish any corroborative evidence, which may support that cash utilized for payment of income tax was from accounted money. The Assessing Officer thereby treated cash payment of income tax as unexplained and added to income of assessee. 4. The Assessing Officer further noted that assessee made time deposit (Fixed Deposit) of Rs. 40,48,658/- and Rs. 35,00,212/- during the year under consideration. The assessee was asked to furnish source of such time deposit/term deposit. The Assessing Officer recorded that assessee avoided to give clear-cut reply to cover-up such issue. The Assessing Off....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fixed deposit along with closer amount of fixed deposit. There was no new investment, assessee also relied upon certain case law that when investment was made on renewal of existing fixed deposit, it cannot be constituted as unexplained investment. The assessee also objected against taxing the addition under section 115BBE. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) on considering the submission of assessee, on the addition of amount of income tax payment in cash, noted that assessee failed to furnish any evidence, which may support his claim that cash utilized for payment of income tax was accounted money. The persona capital account, personal balance-sheet were never filed by assessee before any authority, such necessary evidences are self-generated/self-serving document. Case of assessee was scrutinized for assessment year 2016-17 but no such personal set of account was found during assessment proceedings i.e., for assessment year 2016-17. Thus, available cash-in-hand of Rs. 9,19,797/- was not accepted and the addition to that extent was upheld. So far as withdrawal/transfer from proprietary concern of M/s Bath House, the Ld.CIT(A) held that there is no finding in the assessment order that there was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing Officer. 9. On the other hand, Ld. AR of the assessee supported the order of ld CIT(A), to the extent in deleting the addition of Rs. 6.00 lakhs. In support of his ground of appeal, the Ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee has shown cash withdrawal from the proprietary concern, copy of cash flow statement of M/s Bath House is filed. So far as cash-in-hand as on 01.11.2016 is concerned, assessee has also filed cash flow statement of assessee in his individual capacity. Once the assessee has shown cash balance of Rs. 15,19,797/-, which was sufficient for making payment of income tax. There is no bar for payment of income tax in cash, during the relevant financial year. The Assessing Officer has not rejected the book of assessee. the ld AR of the assessee submits that entire addition was liable to be deleted. 10. We have considered the rival contention of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 15,15,310/- by taking view that assessee has made payment of income tax in cash and that on show cause notice assessee failed to discharge his onus the source of cash available with h....