Shri. Basetteppa B. Badami, Belgaum V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Belgaum

CO 29/PAN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0109 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B BARTHAKUR LD
• Assessee Lawyers: P Y VAIDYA
• Keywords: Peak credit; Revised return
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 : (ASST. YEARS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), BELGAUM (APPELLANT) VS. SRI BASETTEPPA B. BADAMI PROP. : M/S. BELGAUM PIPES & TUBES OLD P.B. ROAD, CANTONMENT COMPLEX, BELGAUM. PAN : A BDPB5252F (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (IN ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014) : (ASST. YEARS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) SRI BASETTEPPA B. BADAMI PROP. : M/S. BELGAUM PIPES & TUBES, OLD P.B. ROAD, CANTONMENT COMPLEX, BELGAUM. PAN : A BDPB5252F (CROSS OBJECTOR) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), BELGAUM (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : P.Y. VAIDYA, ADV. REVENUE BY : B. BARTHAKUR, LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 21/08/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 / 1 0/2014 O R D E R PER P.K. BANSAL 1. ALL THESE A PPEALS AS WELL AS C ROSS OBJECTIONS HAVE BEEN FILED AGAINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF CIT(A) DT. 19.3.2014. IN ALL THE APPEALS, THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUND OF APPEAL : (1) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN ACCEPTING THE ASSESSEES CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHICH WAS PREPARED WITHOUT ANY CORROBORATIVE 2 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT THE EARLIER WITHDRAWN MONEY WAS RE - DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. (2) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN MERELY RELYING UPON THIS CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHICH WAS NOTHING BUT ENTRIES RECORDED ON THE BASIS OF CASH WITHDRAWN AND DEPOSITED IN THE VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS. (3) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT CONSI DERING THE FACTUAL FACTS ARRIVED AT BY THE AO IN ASST ORDER WHILE MAKING ADDITIONS UNDER SECTION 69A ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED MONEY IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. (4) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN IGNORING THE FACT THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS STATED THAT HE HAS DEPOSITED UNACCOUNTED BUSINESS PROCEEDS INTO THESE ACCOUNTS AND THEREFORE, THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT MADE AS AN AFTERTHOUGHT CANNOT BE RELIED UPON. 2. THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSES SEE ARE SUPPORTIVE TO THE ORDER OF CIT(A). SINCE THE FACTS AND THE QUANTUM OF DELETION AGAINST WHICH THE REVENUE HAS COME IN APPEAL ARE DIFFERENT, THEREFORE, EACH YEAR OF APPEAL IS BEING DISPOSED OFF AS UNDER. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THER E HAD BEEN A SURVEY U/S 133 A AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF ASSESSEES FIRM, M/S. BELGAUM PIPES AND TUBES ON 24.8.2011. IT WAS NOTED DURING THE COURSE OF THE SURVEY THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE DEPOSITS BY CHEQUE AND CASH IN VARIOUS BANK ACCOUNTS WITH AXIS BAN K, CANARA BANK, PYGMY ACCOUNTS WITH LOKMANYA CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, TILAKWADI BRANCH, FORT BRANCH - 1 AND BRANCH - 2 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE AO, THEREFORE, ISSUED NOTICE U/S 148 DT. 19.10.2011 FOR A.Y 2006 - 07 AND 2008 - 09 IN RESPONSE T O WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THE RETURN FOR A.Y 2006 - 07 ON 14.9.2011 DECLARING INCOME AT RS. 15,68,736/ - AGAINST THE ORIGINAL INCOME DECLARED AT RS.1,38,737/ - . SIMILARLY, FOR A.Y 2008 - 09 THE RETURN WAS FILED ON 14.9.2011 DECLARING INCOME AT RS.4,43, 740/ - AGAINST THE ORIGINAL RETURN AT NIL . FOR A.Y 2010 - 11 THE REVISED RETURN WAS FILED 3 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) DECLARING INCOME OF RS.62,16,350/ - AGAINST THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF RS.4,76,950/ - . THE INCOME HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AS UNDER : A.Y 2006 - 07 - RS.34,76,698/ - A.Y 2008 - 09 - RS.15,15,058/ - A.Y 2010 - 11 - RS.1,76,48,689/ - THE AO MADE ADDITION U/S 69A IN EACH OF THE A.YS AS UNDER : A.Y 2006 - 07 - RS. 18,51,670/ - A.Y 2008 - 09 - RS. 10,39,297/ - A.Y 2010 - 11 - RS. 1,18,70,722/ - THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). CIT(A) ALLOWED THE RELIEF OF RS.16,51,112/ - IN A.Y 2006 - 07, RS.11,98,461/ - IN A.Y 2008 - 09 AND RS.1,19,86,040/ - IN A.Y 2010 - 11. ITA NO. 184/PNJ/2014 ( A.Y 2006 - 07 ) : 3.1 WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONGWITH THE ORDER OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE NOTED THAT THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE TOTAL DEPOSIT IN BANK AMOUNTING TO RS.33,77,849/ - WHICH INCLUDES CHEQUE OF RS.15,84,00 0/ - AND INTEREST OF RS.96,650/ - (RS.30,872 + RS.65,778) BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED PEAK CREDIT IN THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 AT RS.14,29,529/ - AND THE ASSESSEE HAD DEDUCTED CASH WITHDRAWAL OUT OF TOTAL CASH DEPOSITS WHILE WORKING OUT THE PEAK CREDIT. THE AO, THEREFORE, WORKED OUT THE PEAK CREDIT AFTER GIVING CREDIT TO THE ASSESSEE WHEREVER THERE WAS NEXUS BETWEEN WITHDRAWAL AND THE RE - DEPOSIT OF CASH AND HE WORKED OUT THE PEAK CREDIT AT RS.18,51,670/ - (INCLUDING THE DEPOSIT BY WA Y OF CHEQUE OF RS.15,84,000/ - ). CIT(A) NOTED UNDER PARA 6.2.1 OF ITS 4 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) ORDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT PEAK C REDIT FOR CASH DEPOSIT AT NIL AND CHEQUE DEPOSIT AT RS.15,84,000/ - AND THE INTEREST CREDITED AT RS.1,02,849/ - AND CLAIMED RELIEF OF RS.16,91, 000/ - . WHILE WORKING OUT THE PEAK DEPOSIT WE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN OPENING BALANCE AS ON 1.4.2005 AT RS.24,49,500/ - , AS IS APPEARING AT PG. 23, AS CASH IN HAND BUT WHEN WE INQUIRED FROM THE LEARNED COUNSEL WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ANY WE ALTH TAX RETURN AS CASH IN HAND IN EXCESS OF RS.50,000/ - WAS CHARGEABLE TO WEALTH TAX AS AN ASSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL AGREED THAT NO WEALTH TAX RETURN IN THIS REGARD HAS BEEN FILED. L EARNED COUNSEL EVEN COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE US TO PROVE H OW THIS OPENING BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND OF RS.24,49,500/ - HAS BEEN SHOWN IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR WORKING OUT THE PEAK CREDIT. CIT(A) ON THE BASIS OF THIS CASH FLOW STATEMENT AND SPECIFIC NOTING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING CASH IN HAND OF RS.24,49, 500/ - AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR I.E. 1.4.2005 AFTER NOTING THAT THE TOTAL CASH WITHDRAWAL MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE RS.24,80,198/ - AND THE DEPOSITS MADE ARE ONLY OF RS.21,35,000/ - AND SINCE CASH IN HAND WAS RS.27,9 4 ,699/ - , DELETED THE ADDITION IN RESPEC T OF CASH DEPOSIT AND DIRECTED THE AO THAT THE ASSESSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD COME TO RS.18,25,586/ - I.E. AMOUNT ORIGINALLY RETURNED RS.1,38,737/ - , CHEQUE DEPOSITED RS. 15,84,000/ - AND INTEREST ON BANK RS.1,02,849/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, WHEN WE ASK ED THE ASSESSEE WHAT HAPPENED IN THE EARLIER YEAR, THE LD. AR FILED BEFORE US THE ORDER OF THE AO AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR THE A.Y 2005 - 06. WE NOTED FROM THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR A.Y 2005 - 06 THAT AS ON 1.4.2004 THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN OPEN ING BALANCE OF THE CASH IN HAND AT RS. 1 LAC AND IN THE SAID CASH FLOW STATEMENT ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CLOSING BALANCE ON 24.3.2005 AT RS.24,49,500/ - . CIT(A) IN THE A.Y 2005 - 06 WHEN THE SIMILAR ADDITIONS WERE MADE BY THE AO ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SUM OF RS.6,82,227/ - AS IN HIS OPINION THE PEAK CASH CREDIT DURING THAT YEAR WAS NIL AND SUSTAINED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS. 21,98,759/ - AND INTEREST OF 5 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) RS.51,827/ - . IN THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR WE NOTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CATEG ORICAL FINDING THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR I.E. AS ON 1.4.2004 THERE WAS BALANCE OF RS. 1 LAC WHICH WAS OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWAL OF RS. 5 LACS ON 31.3.2004 OUT OF SB ACCOUNT NO. 14351 WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD WITH CANARA BANK. THE REVENUE HAS NOT COME I N APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER AS MENTIONED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL. WE, THEREFORE, HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE EXCEPT TO ACCEPT THE OPENING BALANCE OF THE CASH IN HAND OF RS.24,49,500/ - AS ON 1.4.2005. IF THE OPENING BALANCE OF RS.24,49,500/ - STANDS ACCEPTED AS NO APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE FOR A.Y 2005 - 06, IN OUR OPINION, NO INTERFERENCE IS REQUIRED IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AS THIS AMOUNT WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO OFF SET THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.16,90,000/ - AS MENTIONED BY THE AO. WE ACCORDINGLY SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ALLOWING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 16,51,112/ - . THUS, GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. THE AO IS FREE, IF HE SO DESIRES, TO TAKE THE ACTION UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT AS THE CLOSING BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND AS PER THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT AS ON 30.3.2006 COMES TO RS.27,94,699/ - . ITA NO. 18 5 /PNJ/2014 ( A.Y 200 8 - 0 9 ) : 3.2 WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONG WITH THE ORDER OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN THIS YEAR ALSO WE NOTED THAT THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED SUM OF RS. 2,81,000/ - THROUGH CHEQUE, SUM OF RS.12,80,250/ - IN CASH (RS.3,62,250 + RS.1,72,000 + RS.3,69,000 + RS.3,77,000). THERE WAS ALSO CREDIT IN THOSE UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNTS IN RESPECT OF INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS.19,335/ - , RS.6,700/ - AND RS.5,883/ - TOTALLING TO RS.31,918/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED PEAK CRE DIT OF RS.5,21,953/ - WHILE THE TOTAL DEPOSIT IN THE BANK WAS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.15,93,271/ - . THEREFORE, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 10,71,318/ - . THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS NO NEXUS BETWEEN THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE CASH AND THE DEPOSITS MADE IN T HE BANK ACCOUNT BUT WHERE HE FOUND THERE WAS NEXUS, HE GAVE DUE CREDIT AND WORKED OUT 6 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) THE PEAK CREDIT AT RS.10,39,297/ - INCLUDING CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS.2,81,000/ - . WHEN THE MATTER WENT BEFORE CIT(A), BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED PEAK IN RESPECT OF CASH DEPOSIT AT NIL AND CHEQUE DEPOSIT AT RS.2,81,000/ - AND THE INTEREST CREDIT AMOUNTING TO RS.35,597/ - AND THUS CLAIMED RELIEF OF RS.12,76,674/ - . WE NOTED THAT CIT(A) ON THE BASIS OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT THE TOTAL CASH WITHDRAWA L MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR IS RS.24,64,583/ - WHILE THE DEPOSITS WERE ONLY RS.15,83,950/ - AND THUS THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING CASH IN HAND OF RS.61,79,332/ - . A S THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN CASH IN HAND AS ON 1.4.2007 AMOUNTING TO RS.52,98,699/ - , H E ALSO GAVE THE FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO NEGATIVE BALANCE OF CASH DURING THE YEAR. WE ASKED THE LD. AR IN THE COURT TO PROVE THE OPENING CASH BALANCE AT RS.52,98,699/ - AND WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ANY WEALTH TAX RETURN AS THE SUM EXCEEDING RS. 50,000 / - CASH IN HAND IS AN ASSET CHARGEABLE UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT BUT HE COULD NOT ADDUCE ANY EVIDENCE AND CONFESSED THAT NO WEALTH TAX RETURN HAS BEEN FILED. EVEN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR THE EARLIER YEAR WAS ALSO NOT PLACED BEFORE US. EVEN NO WORKING EXCLUDING THE OPENING BALANCE WAS FILED BEFORE US. THE PEAK CASH IN HAND HAS TO BE WORKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF THE NEGATIVE BALANCE ON A PARTICULAR DATE. THE ONUS, IN OUR OPINION, LIES ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT HE WAS HAVING CASH IN HAND AS HAS BEEN S HOWN BEFORE CIT(A) AMOUNTING TO RS.52,98,699/ - . SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE ON OUR DIRECTION FILED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND CIT(A)S ORDER FOR A.Y 2007 - 08. WE NOTED FROM THE ORDER FOR A.Y 2007 - 08 THAT THE AO WORKED OUT THE CASH PEAK CREDIT IN THAT YEAR AT RS.7,90,982/ - WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE OPENING BALANCE. SUBSEQUENTLY, WHEN THE MATTER WENT BEFORE CIT(A), CIT(A) NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.7,83,000/ - , CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS.1,05,428/ - AND INTEREST OF RS.90,208/ - WAS CREDITED. THE REFORE, IN VIEW OF THE OPENING BALANCE OF RS.27,94,699/ - COMING FROM A.Y 2006 - 07 THE CIT(A) TOOK THE VIEW THAT DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE CASH WITHDRAWAL AT 7 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) RS.40,30,000/ - WHILE DEPOSITS WERE ONLY RS.15,26,000/ - , THUS, THERE WAS NO NEGATIVE CASH BALANCE DURING THE A.Y 2007 - 08 AND THE CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.3.2007 WAS RS.52,98,699/ - AND ON THAT BASIS THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF PEAK CASH CREDIT MADE BY THE AO. THIS ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AS MENTIONED BY THE LD. AR AND NOT DISPUT ED BY THE LD. DR, WAS NOT CHALLENGED BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL BY THE REVENUE. IN VIEW OF CIT(A)S ORDER DT. 19.3.2014 FOR A.Y 2007 - 08 WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE FINDING OF CIT(A) HAS BECOME FINAL AND STANDS ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVIN G CLOSING CASH IN HAND AS ON 31.3.2007 AT RS.52,98,699/ - EVEN THOUGH NO WEALTH TAX RETURN HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THIS ORDER OF CIT(A) WE ARE BOUND TO ACCEPT THE OPENING CASH IN HAND AT RS.52,98,699/ - . IF THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING THIS OP ENING BALANCE OF CASH IN HAND, WE DO AGREE WITH THE CIT(A) THAT THERE WILL NOT BE ANY PEAK CASH CREDIT AND THEREFORE, CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF PEAK CASH CREDIT. WE, ACCORDINGLY, CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A). TH E AO IS FREE, IF HE SO DESIRES, TO TAKE THE ACTION UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT. ITA NO. 18 6 /PNJ/2014 ( A.Y 20 1 0 - 11 ) : 3.3 WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONGWITH THE ORDER OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN THIS YEAR ALSO WE NOTED THAT THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.50,56,220/ - THROUGH CHEQUE (RS.23,22,720 + RS.27,33,500) IN THE UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNTS, A SUM OF RS.1,24,62,990/ - IN CASH (RS.76,01,000 + RS.3,08,990 + RS.33,50,000 + 12,03,000) IN THE UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNTS. THERE WAS ALSO CREDIT IN RESPECT OF INTEREST IN THIS BANK ACCOUNT AMOUNTING TO RS.56,196/ - , RS. 4,836/ - , RS.49,350/ - AND RS.19,097/ - . THUS, HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.1,76,48,689/ - BUT DECLARED PEAK CREDIT OF RS.56,67,585/ - . THE AO, THEREFORE, WORKED OUT THE DUES OF RS.1,19,81,104/ - WHICH CONSISTS OF 8 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) INTEREST OF RS.1,10,382/ - AND ADDED THE SUM IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). BEFORE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE PEAK CREDIT HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE AO ON AD HOC BASIS, EVEN THOUGH THE AO ACCEPTED THAT THE PEAK CREDIT HAS TO BE ADDED. THE ASSESSEE WORKED OUT THE PEAK C REDIT AT NIL WHILE DID NOT DISPUTE THE CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS.50,56,220/ - AND ALSO SUBMITTED INTEREST AT RS.1,29,479/ - AND THUS CLAIMED A RELIEF OF RS.1,24,62,990/ - . CIT(A) BY TAKING THE OPENING BALANCE IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT AS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSE E AT RS.61,79,332/ - GAVE A CATEGORICAL FINDING AFTER PERUSING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO THAT THE WORKING DONE BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARITHMETICALLY CORRECT AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE IS NO NEGATIVE BALANCE OF CASH DURING THE YEAR WHICH IS MERELY D UE TO THE REASON THAT THE WITHDRAWALS DURING THE YEAR AND THE CASH IN HAND AS ON 1.4.2009 FAR EXCEEDS THE CASH DEPOSITS DURING THE YEAR. THE TOTAL CASH WITHDRAWALS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR ARE RS.1,93,21,888/ - AND THE DEPOSITS MADE ARE ONLY RS .2,25,39,000/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING OPENING CASH BALANCE OF RS.48,39,974/ - AS ON 1.4.2009 AND A CLOSING CASH IN HAND AS ON 31.3.2010 AT RS.16,22,862/ - . CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF CHEQUE DEPOSIT OF RS.50,56,220/ - AND INTER EST OF RS.1,29,479/ - AND ALLOWED RELIEF OF RS.1,19,86,040/ - . CIT(A), WE NOTED, IN HIS ORDER HAS REPRODUCED THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FROM 1.4.2008 AND WHILE WORKING OUT THE OPENING CASH IN HAND ON 1.4.2009 AT RS.48,39,974/ - TOOK CASH IN HAND AS ON 1.4.2008 AT RS.61,79,332/ - . CIT(A), WE ALSO NOTED, WHILE ACCEPTING THE CASH IN HAND HAS NOT EXAMINED WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ANY WEALTH TAX RETURN AS THE SUM EXCEEDING RS. 50,000/ - CASH IN HAND IS AN ASSET CHARGEABLE UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT. THE LD. DR EV EN THOUGH RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO COULD NOT ADDUCE ANY EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL BEFORE US IN THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT WHICH HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS IN THE REMAND REPORT FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR. WE HAVE ALREADY OBSERVED THAT ONLY THE PEAK CASH 9 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) CREDIT WHICH REPRESENTS THE NEGATIVE BALANCE OF THE CASH CAN BE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE NO SUCH BALANCE WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE AND THE OPENING BALANCE AS ON 1.4.2008 STANDS ACCEPTED, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND WE CONFIRM THE SAME. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. THE AO IS FREE, IF HE SO DESIRES, TO TAKE THE ACTION UNDER THE WEALTH TAX ACT. 3.4 BEFORE CONCLUDING OUR ORDER, WE MAY OBSERV E THAT WE DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ON THE BASIS THAT BY ACCEPTING THE CASH FLOW OPENING BALANCE THE REVENUE HAS NOT COME IN APPEAL IN THE A.YS 2005 - 06 AND 2007 - 08 AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. AR. IN CASE IT IS FOUND THAT THE REVENUE HAS COME IN A PPEAL IN THOSE YEARS, THE REVENUE CAN MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RE - CALLING OF THESE ORDERS. 3.5 SO FAR AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE CONCERNED, THEY ARE JUST SUPPORTIVE. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY DISMISSED THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND THEREFORE STAND DISMISSED AS SUCH. 4. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 1 / 1 0/2014. S D / - (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER S D / - (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI DATED : 0 1 / 1 0/2014 *SSL* 10 ITA NOS. 184 TO 186/PNJ/2014 & CO NOS. 28 TO 30/PNJ/2014 (A.YS : 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 & 2010 - 11) COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT CONCERNED (4) CIT(A) CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER