Case Law Details
M. Natarajan Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
ITAT Chennai held that addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act sustained as no corroborative evidence produced to prove the source for the cash deposits during demonetization period.
Facts- The case was selected for scrutiny for verification of cash deposits made during demonetization period and thus, consequent notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was issued and duly served on the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee has made cash deposits of Rs. 48,59,000/- between 15.11.2016 and 01.12.2016 to his savings bank account. The AO, has called upon the assessee to explain source for cash deposits made during demonetization period.
In response, the assessee submitted that source for cash deposits was out of sale proceeds of ancestral property (agricultural land). He further, submitted that initially receipts from sale of property was deposited into joint account of assessee and my sister-in-law and later my sister-in-law has withdrawn money from her bank account on 29.01.2013 and gave a gift to the assessee. The source for cash deposit is out of gift received from my sister-in-law. Therefore, he submitted that question of making additions does not arise.
However, rejected arguments of the assessee and made additions towards cash deposits in Axis bank as unexplained money of the assessee. CIT(A) rejected the arguments of the assessee and sustained the additions. Accordingly, being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
