Usha Patodia Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
ITAT Kolkata held that addition towards unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act cannot be sustained since the cash deposit is already added while filing the return of income under the head other sources. Accordingly, addition set aside and appeal allowed.
Facts- The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny for examination of cash deposited during demonetization period. Post issuance of show cause notice and examination thereof, Assessing Officer added Rs. 42 Lacs by treating the same as unexplained money. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Held that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 42 lacs in the bank account during the demonetization period and the same was added while filing the return of income under the head other sources and taxes were paid as applicable but not in accordance with Section 115BBE of the Act. We note that the ld. Assessing Officer has not disputed the return filed by the assessee, wherein the assessee has suomoto shown the cash deposit of Rs.42 lacs as income. However, made another addition over and above the income declared by the assessee towards cash deposited resulting into double addition of the same amount of income and also levied taxes at the rate as provided u/s 115BBE of the Act. In our opinion, the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) is totally wrong as the same income cannot be taxed twice. On the one hand the ld. Assessing Officer accepted the income declared by the assessee in the return of income, which included the amount of ₹42 lacs deposited as cash into the bank account of the assessee and secondly, the addition was made by way of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. In our opinion, the said addition is wrong and against the provisions of the Act.
