Cash deposited in bank from amount given by husband for household expenses. ITAT accepted the explanation and deleted addition made u/s 69A
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3060 (2019) (07) ITAT
The instant appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) whereby he partially sustained addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The assessee was an individual and filed her return of income which was selected for limited scrutiny on account of large value of transactions.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed from the bank account of the assessee that there were huge cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee in the two bank accounts maintained by her.
After considering the various arguments advanced by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made an addition to the total income of the assessee by invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act.
In appeal, before the CIT(A), the assessee reiterated her arguments that the deposits in the two bank accounts were out of past savings, ‘sthridhan’, gift from family and amount/gift given by her husband on various dates. It was further explained that the various explanations given by the assessee were summarily rejected by the Assessing Officer. Relying on various decisions, it was argued that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was not sustainable in law.
The CIT(A) granted relief but partly sustained the addition. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal observed that the assessee was employed as a director and filing regular income-tax returns. For the relevant assessment year and two preceding years the assessee had consistently declared income in the range of Rs. 3-4 lakhs.
The Tribunal also observed that the husband of the assessee had declared substantial amount of gross total income for the relevant assessment year and for last two years
In view of the above, the Tribunal agreed with the submission of the assessee that a part of the deposit was also out of the amount given by the husband of the assessee who was a salaried employee.
The Tribunal noted that since the CIT(A), on the basis of the income of the assessee had partly deleted the addition for which the Revenue was not in appeal.
Therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and considering the substantial salary income declared by the husband of the assessee, the Tribunal accepted the submission of the assessee that part of the amount was out of the amount of savings from the amount given by the husband of the assessee for household expenses.
Accordingly. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.
