Case Law Details
DCIT Vs Smt. Veena Awasthi (ITAT Lucknow)
Conclusion: Addition made by AO merely on the ground that assessee made frequent withdrawal and deposit of his own money was not justified as the same was not prohibited under any law.
Held: AO had noted the behavioural pattern of assessee in frequently withdrawing cash and then depositing cash again in the bank account irrespective of having sufficient cash with her. He, therefore, added cash deposit made by assessee under the head income from undisclosed sources. It was noted that AO nowhere in his order had brought out any material on record to show that assessee was not having an additional source of income other than that disclosed in the return nor AO could spell out in his order that cash deposits made by assessee were from some undisclosed source. There is no law in the country which prevents citizens to frequently withdraw and deposit his own money. Documentary evidence furnished clearly clarified that on each occasion at the time of deposit in her bank account, assessee had sufficient availability of cash. Entire transaction of withdrawals and deposits were duly reflected in the bank account of assessee and were verifiable from relevant records. Thus, addition was not justified.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
This appeal preferred by the Revenue emanates from the order of ld. CIT(A)-I, Lucknow dated 29/1/2016 as per following grounds of appeal:-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
