Rajiv Venkatpathi Gowda Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
No Proof, No Relief -Admitted Salary & Unexplained Deposits – Appeal Fails Before ITAT Bangalore
A search u/s 132 was conducted on 17.02.2021 in the case of MG Charitable Trust, where Assessee was a trustee. Cash, jewellery & silver articles were seized. Assessee admitted u/s 132(4) to having collected unaccounted cash from students for medical college admissions & offered it as additional income in his own hands. Notice u/s 153C was issued. Assessee filed return declaring only ₹3 lakh as “income from other sources”.
AO noticed salary credits from MG Charitable Trust where Assessee was “Director, Admissions”. Assessee contended deposits were salary pertaining to AY 2015-16 but offered in AY 2018-19. AO rejected the plea since-
Salary is taxable on accrual, not receipt basis & Appointment letter itself was dated 02.04.2017. AO made additions of ₹8,60,046 as salary u/s 17, ₹14,82,500 as unexplained investments u/s 69 (credits not from Trust & source not explained) & ₹2,49,505 LIC premium also disallowed, but later relief was given by CIT(A).
CIT(A) confirmed addition of salary ₹8.6 lakh & unexplained credits ₹14.82 lakh but allowed LIC premium claim.
Tribunal’s Findings
- Assessee remained absent during hearings & furnished no fresh evidence.
- At assessment stage itself, Assessee admitted that bank deposits were salary; hence, addition under “salary” was justified.
- For ₹14.82 lakh deposits, no explanation or evidence furnished. Hence, treated as unexplained investment u/s 69.
- Tribunal found no merit in any of the grounds.
When Assessee himself admits bank credits as salary & fails to substantiate source of deposits, Tribunal will uphold additions u/s 17 & u/s 69. Mere raising of grounds without evidence carries no weight.
