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

  • Income Tax

Prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 can not be a non-existing or incorrect information

The prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 cannot be stretched to a non-existing information or incorrect information - ITAT In a…

11 hours ago
  • SEBI

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices published by the recognized stock exchanges…

20 hours ago
  • bankruptcy

SC allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor & corporate guarantor

Supreme Court allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor and its corporate guarantor, declines to frame any guidelines In a…

21 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Merely because sales were declared for only one month, same cannot be treated as bogus

Merely because assessee had declared sales for only one month, the same cannot be treated as bogus on the basis…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT deleted addition as method of accounting had been accepted in earlier years

ITAT deleted addition as the method of accounting had been accepted by the department in earlier years and the entire…

2 days ago
  • Benami

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under IBC 2016 – SC

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - SC In a recent judgment,…

3 days ago