Income Tax

When savings bank interest declared in ITR, it cannot be said that bank account not disclosed

When bank interest was declared in ITR, it cannot be said that bank account was not disclosed to the Revenue

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2904 (2019) (05) ITAT

The instant appeal was filed by the Assessee against the Order of the CIT(A) on the issue of addition of unexplained cash deposits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of deposit in bank account.

The Revenue received AIR information that the assessee had made cash deposits in his Savings Bank Account with two banks which was not disclosed in his return of income.

Hence, the case was reopened and notice under section 148 was served upon the assessee.

The assessee submitted that he was engaged in business of retail trading and the cash deposits in his bank accounts were out of sale turnover effected during the financial year and payments received from outstanding debtors.

However, the assessee failed to furnish evidences to substantiate its claim with regard to cash deposited in his bank accounts. The AO accordingly made the addition.

The CIT(A) accepted one bank account because it was disclosed in the return of income. However confirmed the addition towards cash deposited in another bank account.

The Tribunal observed that assessee had been filing the return of income under section 44AD of the Act as such, assessee was not required to maintain books of account.

The Tribunal opined that since rhe assessee had disclosed interest income in the return of income from both the Bank Accounts, therefore, it could not be said that any of the bank had not been disclosed to the Revenue Department.

The Tribunal opined that the material on record clearly suggested that assessee was doing business activities and different sale proceeds amounts received from the debtors, which had been deposited in the Bank Accounts.

The Tribunal opined that when one Bank account was accepted by the CIT(A) because it was disclosed in the return of income, he on the same reasoning should not have made the addition against the assessee as the other bank accounts had been disclosed in the computation of income filed with the return of income.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the Orders of the authorities below and deleted the entire addition.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Insurance

Calculation of functional disability depends on victim’s earning capacity in open market – SC

Calculation of functional disability depends on assessing the victim’s earning capacity in the open, competitive market – Supreme Court In…

21 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Appeal against ITAT shall lie only before High Court within whose jurisdiction AO is situated

Appeal against every decision of ITAT shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who…

2 days ago
  • Excise/Custom

SC recommends action against Customs Officer who relied upon AI generated fake case laws

Supreme Court recommends action against Commissioner of Customs who relied upon non-existent AI generated case laws. Supreme Court recommends action…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

Non- payment of cost imposed can’t trigger automatic confirmation of an invalid exparte assessment.

ITAT power to pass such orders "as it thinks fit" implies a judicial discretion to be exercised within the parameters…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

Non-deduction of TDS does not make transaction as unexplained in the hands of deductee – ITAT

Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…

7 days ago
  • ICAI

Last date to submit MEF 2026-27 extended to 09.09.2026

ICAI has extended the last date to online submit Multipurpose Empanelment Form (MEF)- 2026-27 from 29th August 2026 to 9th…

7 days ago