Subhash Runwal Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
ITAT Pune held that once primary reason to believe that income had escaped assessment fails then AO doesn’t possess jurisdiction to tax any other income in reassessment order. Hence, re-assessment is unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
Facts- The assessee is an individual who failed to file his return of income for the year under consideration hence was identified as ‘non-filer’ by the Revenue. Upon the receipt of information that, the assessee deposited a cash of ₹75Lakhs into his saving bank account maintained with ‘Mahesh Sahakari Bank Ltd’ and was in receipt of certain interest of ₹1.625Lakhs from Mr Vinod Jain the case of the assessee was re-opened u/s 148 of the Act vide notice dt. 30/03/2019.
Assessee duly explained that cash deposit was mostly from past immediate cash withdrawals, hence no addition there account was ultimately made in the assessment framed by the Ld. AO.
However the verification of loan ledger accounts of M/s Vinod Construction & M/s BU Bhandari certain discrepancies were noted and when assessee’s explanation could not convincingly clarify such notified discrepancies, AO added the difference of ₹10Lakhs u/s 69 of the Act and ₹2Lakhs u/s 69A of the Act from the former loan ledger accounts respectively and framed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act.
