The case ITA 1589/DEL/2020 was filed by Rattan Singh, New Delhi against ITO Circle-26(2), New Delhi concerning the assessment year 2009-10. The appeal arises out of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-15, New Delhi, dated 27/04/2015, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 14,52,105/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the scrutiny assessment.
The appellant, Rattan Singh, filed his return of income declaring Rs. 1,42,170/- on 31/03/2010. The return was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS, and statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee.
During the scrutiny assessment, the AO confronted the assessee with information regarding a cash deposit of Rs. 21,74,750/- in his savings bank account with ICICI Bank, Meera Bagh, New Delhi. The assessee explained that he was engaged in construction work and trading activities, and the transactions were made from his savings bank account. However, the AO only partly accepted this explanation and made an addition of Rs. 14,52,105/- as unexplained cash deposits.
The assessee carried the matter to the CIT(A), reiterating his explanations and adding that the cash deposits were partly sourced from withdrawals made by his mother. The CIT(A) upheld the AO’s decision, stating that the explanation provided was not substantiated with evidence.
The tribunal, comprising Sh. N.K. Billaiya (Accountant Member), heard the appeal. Despite multiple notices, the appellant did not attend the appellate proceedings, leading the tribunal to proceed ex parte based on the material available on record.
The tribunal reviewed the case records and the arguments presented by the Revenue, represented by Sh. Om Parkash, Senior Departmental Representative (DR). The tribunal found that the assessee provided inconsistent explanations for the cash deposits, failing to substantiate the sources with supporting evidence. Initially, the assessee claimed the deposits were from business receipts, then later claimed they were withdrawals from his mother’s account.
Given the lack of evidence to support the appellant’s claims, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s decision to confirm the addition of Rs. 14,52,105/-. The tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)’s findings and dismissed the appeal.
In light of the foregoing, the appeal under ITA No. 1589/DEL/2020 was dismissed. This order was pronounced in the open court on 12/10/2022.
(N. K. BILLAIYA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 12/10/2022
ITA 1589/DEL/2020: Rattan Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO Circle-26(2), New Delhi – Assessment Year 2009-10
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform