Shalaka Chandrahas Chavan Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Cash Deposit Fully Explained as Sale Consideration – Section 69A requires the AO to disprove the explanation with material evidence – Accordingly, the addition of Rs.13,00,500 u/s 69A was deleted & the Assessee’s appeal was allowed.
Mumbai Tribunal examined the limited issue of addition of Rs.13,00,500 treated as unexplained money u/s 69A.
Assessee had sold an immovable property for Rs.94,06,000 during the year & received part of the sale consideration in cash. Information in AIMS module triggered reopening u/s 148 & despite filing a return in response, AO treated it as invalid due to a technical flag & refused to examine the evidences already furnished. AO proceeded mechanically to treat the entire sale consideration as unexplained merely on the ground of invalid return.
On appeal, NFAC accepted the capital gains working but sustained addition u/s 69A. Before the Tribunal, Assessee produced the registered sale deed & the receipt annexed to it which clearly recorded receipt of Rs.61,00,000 during the year, including Rs.38,15,000 in cash. ICICI Bank statements also reflected contemporaneous deposits of this very cash. The Revenue never disputed the sale deed, the annexed receipt or the matching bank entries. Tribunal held that when the registered instrument itself records cash receipt & the bank statement contains matching deposits, there is no basis in law to treat the cash as unexplained. Section 69A requires the AO to disprove the explanation with material evidence; here the explanation was fully supported by primary documents.
