Case Law Details
Leela Devi Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
It is not in dispute that assessee made cash deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs in her bank account during demonetization period. The assessment year under appeal is 2017-18 and the assessee deliberately filed the return of income belatedly on 25.03.2018. The assessee explained before AO the source of the cash deposit in the bank account was life time savings and cash withdrawn from the bank in earlier years for personal security and other household expenditures. However, assessee has not filed any further details before AO. The money which was withdrawn from June, 2014 to November, 2014. As per explanation of the assessee this amount would have been expanded by the assessee for personal security and other household expenditure and would not have been available to the assessee for making cash deposit in her bank account in November, 2016. Assessee has failed to explain before the authorities below that from year June, 2014 till November 2016, what was her source to make household expenditures. In absence of these details Ld. DR rightly contended that when Rule of preponderance of probability is applied to the facts of the case, whatever amount was withdrawn by assessee from her bank account in the year 2014 must have been incurred by her on household expenditures. As regards, the matrimonial dispute between son of the assessee and her daughter-in-law, divorce petition was filed in October, 2014 and according to explanation of the assessee, she has taken loan of Rs. 25,16,722/- in June, 2014 for settlement of the matrimonial dispute. If the same amount was withdrawn of Rs. 18 lakhs in year 2014, it was not connected with matrimonial dispute of the son of assessee because the divorce matter was settled in August, 2019 only and assessee has paid first installment of Rs. 7 lakhs in August, 2019 and, thereafter, the balance amount was to be paid in two installments. Thus, it is a story created by assessee for withdrawing the amount for settlement of the matrimonial dispute which has no connection whatsoever with the money withdrawn from the Bank. It may also be noted that the amounts withdrawn earlier in year 2014 from the bank account of the assessee was in ten installments of Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 3 lakh respectively. When the matrimonial dispute was not settled till August, 2019, there was no reason for the assessee to keep the cash at home. When assessee made cash deposits of Rs. 15 lakhs in three installments in her bank account in November, 2016, would lead to irresistible conclusion that assessee was keeping unaccounted cash money of Rs. 15 lakhs with her at the time of demonetization period and the assessee realizing that such currency cannot be used anywhere, she deposited same in her bank account and purposely the return of income was filed belatedly on 25.03.2018 after expiry of the period provided u/s 139(1) for filing of the return of income within the period of limitation. The decisions relied upon by Ld. Counsel for assessee are thus, clearly distinguishable from the facts of the case because the explanation of the assessee does not inspire any confidence of this court to accept the explanation of the assessee. There is a contradiction in the explanation of the assessee made before AO as well as before Ld. CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that assessee failed to explain the source of cash deposit in her bank account during demonetization period. Thus, assessee failed to explain the sources, therefore, no interference is called for in the matter.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-13, New Delhi dated 25.02.2020 for AY 2017-18, challenging the addition of Rs. 15 lakhs on account of unexplained cash deposit in bank account u/s 69A of the IT Act.
2. I have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties through Video Conferencing and perused the material on record.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
