Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sirsa V. ACIT, Sirsa

ITA 1165/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0050 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH GUPTA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Business income
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 68

Judgement Text

1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BE NCH B, CHANDIGARH !, ' # $ , . .. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR , A M ./ ITA NO. 1165/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 SHRI. SANJAY KUMAR S/O SH. JAGDISH RAI 92, RSD COLONY, SIRSA(HARYANA) THE ACIT SIRSA CIRCLE SIRSA ./ PAN NO: AANPA3950G / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. GAUTAM JAIN, SHRI. TEJ MOHAN S INGH ! / REVENUE BY : SHRI. ASHISH GUPTA ' !# $/ DATE OF HEARING : 30/04/2019 %&'()* $/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29/05/2019 ')/ ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, A.M: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), HISAR DT. 14/09/2016. 2. IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FO LLOWING GROUNDS: 1 THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS)-HISAR HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT DATED 30.3.2014 FRAMED UNDER SECTION 153 A/143(3) OF THE ACT DETERM INING THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AT RS. 34,47,339/- DESPITE THE FACT THE S AME WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND, DESERVE TO BE QUASHED AS SUCH. 1.1 THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT NEITHER NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A O F THE ACT AND NOR NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON SERVE D ON THE APPELLANT BEFORE FRAMING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT AND IN ABS ENCE OF ISSUE OR SERVICE OF A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT OR UNDER SEC TION 153 A OF THE ACT, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ASSESSMENT WAS WITHOUT JURISDICTI ON. 2 THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) HAS FURTHER ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING AN ADDITION OF RS. 30,00,000/- REPRESENTING CASH REQUISITION U/S 132A BY INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT FROM PUNJAB POLICE SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF CHECKING BY THE POLICE PARTY O N ACCOUNT OF LIMITS IMPOSED BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION IN VIEW OF THE ELECTIONS TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF STATE OF PUNJAB. 2.1 THAT THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT 'THE SOURCE OF CASH SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF ELE CTIONS OF RS. 30,00,000/- CANNOT BE STATED TO HAVE BEEN PROVED CONCLUSIVELY AS NOT B ELONGING TO THE APPELLANT AND AS THE SOURCE HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED FROM THE B OOKS OF THE APPELLANT, THE SAME HAS BEEN CORRECTLY TREATED AS OUT OF UNEXPLAIN ED SOURCES BY THE AO' IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT, LEGALLY MISCONCEIVED AND THUS UNTENABLE. 2 2.2 THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN RECORDING VARIOUS ADVERSE INFER ENCES WHICH ARE CONTRARY TO THE FACTS ON RECORD, MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AND, ARE OTHERWISE UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND THEREFORE, ADDITION SO SUSTAINED IS ABSO LUTELY UNWARRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT, IT BE HELD THAT ASSES SMENT MADE BY THE LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER AND SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BE QUASHED AND, FURTHER ADDITION SO UPHEL D BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALONGWITH INTE REST LEVIED BE DELETED AND APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT BE ALLOWED. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FI LED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.09.2012 DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 4,47,339/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR COMPULSORY SCRUTINY U/S 153 A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 ON THE BASIS OF REQUISITION U/S 132A WHERE INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED ON 04.01.2012 FROM ONE OF THE STATIC SURVEILLANCE TEAMS AND POLICE OFFICIALS THAT THEY INTERCEPTED ONE PERSON, SH. SANJAY KUMAR AGGARWAL S/O SH. JAGDISH R AI R/O 92 RSD COLONY SIRSA, DISTT. SIRSA, HARYANA, WHO WAS CARRYING CASH OF RS. 30,00,000/-. IT WAS CLAIMED THAT SH. SANJAY KUMAR IS THE PARTNER OF THE FIRM NA MED M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS, MANDI DABWALI. HE STATED IN HIS REPLY THAT THE AMOUNT SEIZED WAS WITHDRAWN FROM M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS. 4. SH. SANJAY KUMAR STATED IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDE D ON THE SPOT WHERE CASH WAS FOUND THAT HE WAS A PARTNER IN THE FIRM M/ S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS, C/O M/S HARYANA COTTON FACTORY, CHOTTA ROAD, MANDI DABWALI, HARYANA. HE STATED THAT HE HAD TAKEN THE DABWALI RICE & COTT ON MILLSON LEASE FOR TWO YEARS. REGARDING THE SOURCE OF AMOUNT OF RS. 30,00, 000/-, HE STATED THAT HE HAD WITHDRAWN THE AMOUNT FROM SBI, MANDI DABWALI FROM T HE ACCOUNT OF M/S. DABWALI RICE AND COTTON MILLS, ON 04.01.2012 ITSELF , AND WAS CARRYING THE SAME FOR PAYMENT TO FARMERS IN THE COTTON FACTORY. HE FU RNISHED AT THE SPOT A CERTIFICATE FROM SBI, MANDI DABWALI CERTIFYING THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 30 LACS HAD BEEN WITHDRAWN BY M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS I N CASH THROUGH CHEQUE NO. 829567 THROUGH SH. PAWAN, EMPLOYEE OF THE SAID FIRM ON 04.01.2012. THE DETAILS OF THE DENOMINATIONS WERE ALSO MENTIONED IN THE SAM E CERTIFYING LETTER 500*2000 = 10,00,000/- AND 1000*2000=20,00.000/-. THE ACCOUN T STATEMENT WAS ALSO FURNISHED FOR ONLY ONE DATE, 04.01.2012, SHOWING CR EDIT OF RS. 30 LACS BY TRANSFER FROM '31466524242' AND IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL OF THE SAME RS. 30 LACS BY CASH FROM THE SAME ACCOUNT NUMBER 30916175537. A PHOTO C OPY OF THE CHEQUE USED FOR THE SAME WITHDRAWAL WAS ALSO FURNISHED SHO WING WITHDRAWAL BY SELF. SH. SANJAY KUMAR STATED THAT THE TRANSFER OF RS. 30 LAC S WAS RECEIVED FROM ONE SHRI RADHA KRISHAN COTTON PVT. LTD. MANDI DABWALI, BUT C OULD NOT STATE AS TO 3 WHETHER SUCH HUGE TRANSFER AND WITHDRAWALS WERE A R EGULAR PART OF THEIR BUSINESS TRANSACTION STATING I CANNOT SAY ANYTHING NOW. 4.1 WHEN ASKED ABOUT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT [CASH BOO K AND LEDGER] SHOWING THE ABOVE TRANSACTION, HE REPLIED THAT 'I C ANNOT PRODUCE THE ACCOUNTS TODAY, BECAUSE THE ACCOUNTS ARE AT MANDI DABWALI AN D DUE TO COLD SEASON AND DARKNESS, THE A/C BOOKS CANNOT BE PRODUCED TODA Y, THE SAME SHALL BE PRODUCED TOMORROW AT 11.00 AM.' HOWEVER, NOBODY PRO DUCED THE BOOKS TILL 1.30 PM OF 05.01.2012. DESPITE GIVING OPPORTUNITY, THE SOURCE AND PURPOSE OF THE SAME CASH WAS NOT EXPLAINED BY THE PERSONS IN WHOSE CUSTODY, IT WAS FOUND. IN VIEW OF THE CASH SEIZED FROM THE ASSESSEE, THE SAME WAS ADDED AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 5. THE LD. CIT(A)AFTER GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING REASO NS : A) THE CASH SEIZURE WAS AN ABSOLUTE SEIZURE BY THE DEP ARTMENT BASED ON THE STATEMENT RECORDED AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE. B) THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE WAS A PARTNER OF THE FI RM M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS, CHOTA ROAD MANDI AT THE TIME OF THE R ECORDING OF THE STATEMENT WHEREAS IT WAS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WA S NOT A PARTNER OR THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THE SAID FIRM. C) THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING SUCH LARGE QUANTITY OF CA SH WAS AWARE THAT SUCH CASH WAS LIABLE TO BE SEIZED AT THE TIME OF EL ECTIONS. D) THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE CASH WAS FOR DISTRIBUT ION AMONGST COTTON FARMERS. BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO PRODUC E ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE CASH WAS TO BE DISTRIBUTED AMONGST FARMERS E) THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT LEAD TO ANY EVIDENCE THAT IT WAS THE USUAL PRACTICE THAT PAYMENTS WERE RECEIVED IN CASH FOR SA LE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE OR ANYTHING ELSE. F) ABSENCE OF SUCH EVIDENCE LEAD TO THE INEVITABLE PRE SUMPTION THAT FUNDS WERE BEING DIRECTED FOR SOME OTHER PURPOSE DURING E LECTIONS AND THE EVIDENCE NOW PRODUCED HAS BEEN CREATED TO EXPLAIN S UCH DIVERSION. G. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE BOOKS OF AC COUNTS (CASH BOOK AND LEDGER) SHOWING THE ABOVE TRANSACTION. HE IN HIS ST ATEMENT ON 04.01.2012 STATED THAT 'HE CANNOT PRODUCE THE ACCOUNTS TODAY' AND STATED THAT HE 4 SHALL PRODUCE THE SAME ON THE NEXT DAY. THE DCIT, S IRSA IN HIS ORDER U/S 132B OF THE I.T. ACT DATED 12.10.2012 HAS RECORDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN MORE THAN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE RELEVAN T BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PRODU CE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS DURING THE COURSE OF ENQUIRY. H). THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED HIS OWN RETURN OF IN COME ALONGWITH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR A.Y. 2011-12 AND A.Y. 2012-13. THE A BOVE CASH IS NOT EXPLAINED FROM THE FINANCIALS OF THE ASSESSEE HIMSE LF. I). THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DRAWING ANY SALARY FROM M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS AND HAS NOT SHOWN PROOF OF ANY INTEREST IN TH E SAID FIRM. THAT THE SAID CASH BELONGED TO THE FIRM AND NOT TO THE ASSESSEE I S NOT EXPLAINED FROM THE EVIDENCES FILED. THE ASSESSEE DURING RECORDING OF H IS STATEMENT COULD NOT STATE AS TO WHETHER SUCH HUGE TRANSFERS AND WITHDRA WALS WERE REGULAR PART OF HIS BUSINESS. HIS STATEMENTS THAT HE HAD TAKEN M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS ON LEASE FOR TWO YEARS, ALSO COULD NOT BE PRO VED FROM EVIDENCES FURNISHED SUBSEQUENTLY DURING ASSESSMENT. 6. DURING THE ARGUMENTS BEFORE US, WERE BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE THE FACT OF SUBMISSION OF THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES: SR. NO. PARTICULARS PAGE OF PAPER BOOK I) COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 4.1.20 12 CONFIRMING THAT RS. 30 LACS WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM VIDE CHEQUE NO. 829567 THROUGH AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FIRM ON 4.1.2012 39 II) COPY OF CHEQUE NO. 829567 DATED 4.1.2012 DULY AUTHENTICATED BY THE BANK 40 III) COPY OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE FIRM WHERE IN IT HAS BEEN REFLECTED THAT SUM OF RS.30,00,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE FIRM 41- 65 AT PAGE 64 IV) COPY OF AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE PARTNER SHIP FIRM M/S. DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 49-62 V) COPY OF ORDER OF ASSESSMENT OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM M/S. DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 2- 13 UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT 63-65 VI) COPY OF ACCOUNT OF ONE OF THE CUSTOMERS OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM NAM ELY M/S. SHREE RADHA KRISHNA COTEX. WHO HAD ISSUED CHEQUE OF RS. 30,00,000/- ON 3.1.2012 OUT OF WHICH, SUM OF RS. 30,00,000/- WAS WITHDRAWN BY THE APPELLANT 66-67 VII) COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN OF INCOME OF M/S. SHREE RADHA KRISHNA COTEX. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 -12 46-48 VIII) COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF PARTNER OF THE FIRM M/S. DABWA LI RICE AND COTTON MILLS WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN STATED AS UNDE R: 68 5 'I, MANISHA RANI W/O MANISH AGARWAL AGED ABOUT 37 Y EARS RESIDENT OF SIRSA AND PARTNER OF DABWALI RICE & COT TO N MILLS, DABWALI SOLEMNLY AFFIRM AND DECLARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT SHRI SANJAY AGARWAL WAS OUR EMPLOYEE DURING F.Y. 2011-12 AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER FOR DOING DAY TO DAY WORK OF OUR BUSINESS. 2. THAT ON 04.01.2012 HE WAS CARRYING CASH AMOUNTIN G TO RS. 3000000/- (THIRTY LACS) OF THE FIRM FOR MAKING PAYMENTS TO VARIOUS AGRICULTURIST, FROM WHOM THE FI RM HAS PURCHASED NARMA. 3. THAT ABOVE CASH WAS SEIZED BY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INV.). BATHINDA. 4. THAT ABOVE CASH HAS BEEN DULY RECORDED IN THE CA SH BOOK OF DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS. 5. THAT THE ABOVE CASH HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM STAT E BANK OF INDIA, DABWALI WHERE THE FIRM MAINTAINS A CURRENT ACCOUNT NO. 30916175537 WHICH SUMS WAS WITHDRAWN ON 04.01.2012 OUT OF DEPOSITS MADE THROUG H CHEQUES RECEIVED FROM RADHA KRISHNA COTEX PVT. LTD. IX) COPY OF ORDER OF DEPUTY EXCISE AND TAXATION COMMISS ION CUM ASSESSING AUTHORITIES, SIRSA UNDER HARYANA VALU E TAX, 1973 OF DABWALI RICE AND COTTON MILLS FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012- 13. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE RECONCILIATION OF SALE AS PER THE VAT ORDE R AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS PLACED AT PAGE 71 OF PAPER BOOK SHOWS THAT THE TOTAL SALES DURING THE INSTANT YEAR WERE OF RS. 39.19 CRORES. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATI ON DABWALI RICE & GENERAL MILLS HAS ALSO CARRIED OUT COMMISSION AGENCY BUSINESS AND MADE SALES ON COMMISSION BASIS TO M/S. SHREE RADHA KRISHNA COTEX PVT. LTD. AND EARNED COMMISSION OF RS. 194636/- WHICH IS DULY SHOWN AS INCOME IN THE BOOKS OF DABWALI RICE & GENE RAL MILLS, DABWALI. 69-70 X) COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN OF INCOME ALONG W ITH AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF M/S. DABWALI RICE A ND COTTON MILLS FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2010- 11 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 92 - 106 7. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS BEFORE US. THEY E MERGE AS UNDER: I. THE ASSESSEE WAS INTERCEPTED BY THE SURVEILLANCE TEAM AND THE CASH WAS FOUND AND SEIZED ON 04/10/2012. II. AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE OF THE CASH THE STATEMEN T HAS BEEN RECORDED ON 04/10/2012 WHICH REVEALS THAT A. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILLS ON LEASE FOR TWO YEARS. B. THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM THE SBI, MA NDI,DABWALI 6 C. ON THE SAME DAY THE CERTIFICATE OF THE BANK MANA GER REGARDING THE WITHDRAWAL WAS PRODUCED. D. THE DENOMINATIONS OF THE WITHDRAWN CASH WAS SPEC IFICALLY MENTIONED WHICH TALLIED WITH THE SEIZURE . E. THE COPY OF THE CHEQUE USED FOR WITHDRAWAL HAS B EEN PRODUCED. F. THE CHEQUE WAS SIGNED BY MR. VIJAY GOYAL ON BEHA LF OF THE DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILL WHO IS ANOTHER PERSON ALONG WITH THE AS SESSEE WHO TOOK LEASE OF THE DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILL. III. THE ASSESSEE HAS AT THE OUTSET STATED TO THE D EPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF THE SEIZURE THAT HE HAS TAKEN THE DABWALI RICE & COTTON MILL ON LEASE FOR TWO YEARS ALONG WITH TWO PEOPLE NAMELY MRS. MANISHA AGGARWAL AND SHRI. VIJAY GOYAL. THE CHEQUE WAS SIGNED BY SHRI. VIJAY GOYAL. THE LD.CIT( A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A PARTNER IN THE FIRM AS PER THE PARTNERSHIP DEED AND HE IS NOT EVEN EMPLOYEE OF THE FIRM AS HE HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVING ANY SALARY FROM THE FIRM. AT THIS JUNCTUR E IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO TAKE NOTE OF THE INITIAL STATE MENT AND THE DETAILS OF WITHDRAWALS IN RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. IV. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO MADE ADDITION ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE COMPLETE BANK ACCOUNT INCLUDING CAS H BOOK AND LEDGER WITHIN ONE HOUR. THE QUESTION READS AS UNDER: IT IS 6.30 P.M. NOW PLEASE PRODUCE COMPLETE ACCOU NTS OF BANK INCLUDING CASH BOOK AND LEDGER SHOWING THE ABOVE TRANSACTION WITHI N ONE HOUR I.E; BY 7.30 P.M. 8. WE HEREBY NOTE THAT THE STATEMENT IS BEING RECOR DED AT THE TIME OF SEIZURE IN THE MONTH OF JANUARY AND ASSESSEE WAS A SKED TO PRODUCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WITHIN ONE HOUR WHEREAS THE BOOKS OF ACCOUN T ARE KEPT AT MANDI DABWALI. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION BE CAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE BOOKS TILL 1.30 P.M. ON 05/01/2012(ASSES SMENT ORDER PARA 2.1) WHEREAS THE SEIZURE TOOK PLACE ON 04/01/2012. THE A SSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 30/03/2014 WHEREIN THERE WAS NO MENTION OF EITHE R PRODUCTION OR NON PRODUCTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT DURING THE ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS. IT EMANATES THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LD. CIT (A) IGNORED THE FACT THAT THE AMOUNTS WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF M/S DABWALI RICE & COTTON 7 MILL IN SPITE OF PRODUCTION OF CERTIFICATE FROM TH E BANK MANAGER, COPY OF THE CHEQUE AND THE BANK STATEMENT DEPICTING THE WITHDRA WAL. THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE OPINED THAT SUCH LARGE WITHDRAWALS WERE UNCOMM ON AND HENCE THE ADDITION, WHEREAS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF THE BANK STATEMENT IT CAN BE FOUND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN HIGH CASH WITHDRAWALS REGULARL Y IN A CONTINUOUS PATTERN OVER THE ENTIRE YEAR BY THE WAY OF PRESENTING THE C HEQUES. HENCE, THIS WITHDRAWAL CANNOT BE TAKEN AS A STRAY OR ONE TIME I NCIDENCE. THE ASSESSEE HAD A TURNOVER OF RS. 39.19 LACS AND A NUMBER OF CASH P AYMENTS WERE SEEN TO BE MADE TO THE FARMERS IN THIS LINE OF BUSINESS. 9. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT CORRECTLY APPRECIATED THE FACT AND HELD THAT (PARA 7.4) THE SOURCE HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED FROM THE BOO KS OF THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF WHEREAS ITS CLEAR ON RECORDS THAT THE SOURCE HAS BE EN EXPLAINED AS THE WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT ON THE DAY OF SEI ZURE ITSELF, PRODUCTION CERTIFICATE FROM THE BANK , THE DETAILS OF THE CASH FOUND CORRESPOND TO THE NOTES / CURRENCY ISSUED BY THE BANK, COPY OF THE BANK STA TEMENT REFLECTING THE WITHDRAWAL, COPY OF THE CHEQUE PRODUCED WHICH WAS U SED FOR SUCH WITHDRAWAL, DETAILS OF THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN THE ACCOUNT PRIO R TO WITHDRAWAL, THE REGULAR PATTERN OF CASH WITHDRAWAL AND ALL THE RELEVANT MA TERIAL TO PROVE THIS FACT UNDISPUTEDLY PROVES THAT SOURCE OF THE CASH. HENCE KEEPING IN VIEW THE ENTIRETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE HEREB Y DIRECT THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE DELETED. 10. SINCE THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS OF CASE THE TECHNICAL GROUNDS ARE NOT ADJUDICATED BEING ACADEMIC IN NATUR E. 11. AS A RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ! . .. . & , (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. K UMAR) ' #/ JUDICIAL MEMBER '( #/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG DATE: 29/05/2019 &+ ,- .-)/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ' // CIT 4. ' / ()/ THE CIT(A) 5. -!23 4, $ 4*, 67839/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 38 :# / GUARD FILE