Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2026 (7) TMI 426

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the assessee is an individual and not filed his return of income (RoI) for AY 2020-21. The assessment has been subsequently reopened u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act")as per the specific information was flagged as per Risk Management Strategy formulated by the CBDT through ITBA software under the head 'RMS- Non-filing of Return - PAN Cases'. Accordingly, notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2024 was issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act, the assessee has filed RoI on 07.06.2024 declaring total income of Rs. 2,85,500/- by reporting 'income from house property' & 'income from other sources'. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called upon the assessee to e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee, rejected the explanation of the assessee and upheld the additions made towards cash deposits by holding that there is a time gap between withdrawals and subsequent deposit and further, the assessee has failed to establish a direct nexus between the withdrawals and re-deposit. Further, the conduct of the assessee is also against the theory of human preponderous. Since, no evidence has been brought on record to demonstrate that specific withdrawals were in fact kept unutilized for the said purpose, the AO has rightly made cash deposits as unexplained money and added u/s. 69A of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, Mrs. Venk....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s made by the AO should be upheld. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and had gone through orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact of the amount of cash deposits and explanation of the assessee with regard to source for said cash deposits. In fact, the assessee has made two cash deposits on different occasions totaling to Rs. 2,85,000/-. The assessee has made cash deposits of Rs. 85,000/- on 07.06.2019 to the bank account held with Prakasam District Co-op. Central Bank Ltd., Ongole, out of cash withdrawal of Rs. 2 lakhs on 19.03.2019 from the KVB account. The assessee explained the purpose of cash withdrawal and according to the assessee, he has drawn Rs. 2 la....