Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Usha Narayan Chaware Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Appeal Number : ITA No.377/Pun/2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 24/02/2023
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Usha Narayan Chaware Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 15-12-2021 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in relation to the assessment year 2017-18.

2. The appeal is time barred by 94 days. The assesee has filed a condonaton petition explaining the reasons. I am satisfied with the reasons so stated. The delay is, therefore, condoned and the appeal is admitted for disposal on merits.

3. The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.17.00 lakh made by the Assessing Officer (AO) towards cash deposited by the assessee in his bank account during demonetization period.

4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, before his death, was a retired Government servant at the material time. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.17.00 lakh in his bank account on different dates during the demonetization period. On being called upon to explain the source, the assessee submitted that he along with his brother, Shri Vilas Dattatraya Chaware, sold certain agricultural land for a sum of Rs.38.00 lakh on 12-04-2013. The assessee’s share in such sale consideration was Rs.19.00 lakh. It was stated that the cash was kept with his brother for purchase of another property in the nearby vicinity, but the transaction of new purchase could not materialize. The AO called upon the assessee to furnish details of his monthly expenses which was duly furnished along with source thereof. The AO refused to accept the source of cash deposit of Rs.17.00 lakh in bank account during demonetization period on the ground that the agricultural land was sold in 2013 and the cash was deposited in 2016. He, therefore, made the addition of the said sum u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. No relief was allowed by the CIT(A), against which the assessee has approached the Tribunal.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031