Fehmida Begum Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
ITAT Hyderabad held that cash deposit on account of family settlement needs to be proved with documentary evidences like family settlement deed or relinquishment of property right etc. Matter restored with direction to assessee to submit relevant proof.
Facts- Based on information regarding substantial cash deposits during the demonetisation period, AO issued notices to the assessee u/s. 142(1) of the Act on 31.01.2018 and 23.07.2019, but the assessee did not respond. Since no explanation was filed, the entire credit of Rs.28,97,272/-found in the bank account of the assessee was treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- With regard to the deposit of Rs.14,00,000/-, on perusal of the bank statement, it is clearly evident that the sum was credited on 13.11.2016 due to premature encashment of an FDR created on 10.11.2016. This explanation is supported by documentary evidence. Accordingly, the Ld. AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs.14,00,000/-.
With regard to the cash deposit of Rs.13,62,500/- (family settlement), the assessee has relied on affidavits of her siblings and claimed that the money represented a family property settlement. However, no family settlement deed or documentary evidence regarding her relinquishment of property rights, nor any proof of cash availability with the brothers, has been filed. Now the assessee is ready to file the necessary explanation / evidences if an opportunity is provided, to remove the discrepancies noticed by the Revenue authorities. Considering the principle of natural justice and the request of the assessee, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to file necessary evidences in support of her claim before the Ld. AO. Accordingly, we remand the issue to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
