The Amritsar Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has held that CIT (A) require to examine documentary evidences filed by assessee before merely confirming finding of Assessing Officer.
The appellant, Smt. Rani,is an ignorant employee appointed on compassionate grounds against the ex-husband government servant, since 2005. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that appellant had made cash deposits of Rs. 1,648,000 and saving bank account with SBI. The AO, without satisfying the explanation added 6,11,000 out of total deposit as unexplained cash deposit, which has been confirmed by CIT appeal. Against which the assessee filed appeal before ITAT.
The Tribunal observed that the appellant had filed the source of cash deposits in the bank account before the authorities below such as withdrawal received, the cheque of LIC majority received on the death of husband, that bank accounts statement etc.
The Tribunal further observed that the quantum of is required to be taken into consideration while computing cash at hand of a women assessee. The CIT appeal rather commenting upon the requirement of the government servant to intimate under ccs conduct rulesrequired to examine the documentary evidences filed by the assessee as regards to the source of funds of the case deposited in her SB account
before merely confirming the finding of the assessing officer without appreciating the facts of the case.
The Coram of Dr. M. L. Meena, Accountant Member and Mr. Anikesh while deleting the addition and set aside the order of CIT(A) has held that “CIT appeal was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 611,000/-as unexplained cash deposit in the assessee’s saving bank account in absence of any material evidence to that effect”.
Mr. S. M. Surendranath appeared on behalf of the respondent.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
