Income Tax

Additions ignoring peak credit amounts to double taxation if there is no material to show cash withdrawals could not have been re-deposited-ITAT

Additions ignoring peak credit amounts to double taxation if there is no material to show cash withdrawals could not have been re-deposited-ITAT 

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 1082 (2016) (12) ITAT

Brief Facts of the Case:
The Assessing Officer (AO) found that the assessee had not disclosed one bank account in her return of income. From the bank statement, the AO found  that the assessee had deposited cash on various dates amounting to Rs.32,36,112/-. The AO further observed that the assessee had deposited Rs. 20,000/- cash in another bank account. The assessee failed to explain the source of the cash deposits in the bank accounts and hence, the AO made addition of Rs.32,56,112/- to the income of the assessee as unexplained investment.

CIT(A) also confirmed the action of the AO and hence the assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal.

Contentions of the Assessee:
It was submitted that the addition of only peak credit of the Bank account should have been made by the AO. He submitted that immediate withdrawal of cash before the deposit of cash in the bank account should have been allowed as a set off.

Observations made by the Tribunal:
The Tribunal observed that there was also cash withdrawals from the said bank account before making of subsequent cash deposit in the very same bank account. The Revenue could not brought any material to show that the cash withdrawals from the Bank account could not have been utilized by the assessee for making subsequent cash deposit in the said bank account.

The ITAT opined that in the given circumstances, addition of aggregate of cash deposits ignoring the earlier cash withdrawals will lead to double taxation of very same amount.

Held:
The matter was remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for making addition of only peak credit amount of cash deposit made in the bank during the year following peak credit theory.

Download Full Judgment

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

AO is under an obligation to assign reasons for rejecting explanation of the assessee

AO is under an obligation to duly consider the explanation furnished by the assessee and assign reasons for rejecting the…

11 hours ago
  • Excise/Custom

CBIC issues SoP for clearance of imported goods through Foreign Post Offices

CBIC issues SoP for clearance of imported goods through Foreign Post Offices under Postal Import Regulations, 2025.  Standard Operating Procedure…

12 hours ago
  • civil-law

Sale deed executed with full knowledge of only part consideration paid, not void – SC

Sale deed executed with full knowledge of only part consideration paid, cannot be rendered void or inoperative merely for non…

19 hours ago
  • Income Tax

No fault in serving notice to last known address when PAN data was not updated – ITAT

No fault in serving notice u/s 148 to last known address when assessee had not updated change of address in…

21 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Investment by firm through capital introduced by partners cannot be treated as unexplained

Investment made by firm through capital introduced by partners cannot be treated as unexplained investment in the hands of the…

2 days ago
  • ICAI

Hosting of Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF) – 2026-27. Last date to apply : 29.08.2026

Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 is hosted - Last date for submission is 29.08.2026 ICAI has hosted the Multipurpose Empanelment…

2 days ago