Smt. Rupinder Dhanoa Sidhu, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 146/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1515 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJA RAM SAH
• Assessee Lawyers: R S AHUJA
• Keywords: Gift; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Salary income; Source of fund; Valuation report
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 69; 132

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDI CIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 146/DEL/201 6 (A.Y 2012-13) SMT. RUPINDER DHANOA SIDHU C/O. R. S. AHUJA & CO. C.A C-353, DEFENCE COLONY NEW DELHI ACIPD0250F (APPELLANT) VS ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-31 NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SH. R. S. AHUJA, CA RESPONDENT BY SH. RAJA RAM SAH, CIT DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 23/10/2015 PASSED BY CIT(A)-30, NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- (A). THAT ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED ITO/CIT(A) ERRED IN 1. MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 6,60,000/- OUT OF THE CASH FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH EVEN THOUGH COMPLETE JUSTIFICATION & EXPLANATION. FOR THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH WAS GIVEN. 3. RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 15,11,496/- WAS FILED ON 11/02/2013. SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WAS INITIATED IN DATE OF HEARING 22.11.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 28.11.2018 2 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 23/8/2011 AT GURGAON. STATUTORY NOTICES U/S 143(2) WAS ISSUED ON 11/9/2013 AND WAS SERVED. THE REAFTER, A QUESTIONNAIRE U/S 142(1) DATED 28/7/2014 WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESS EE. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE, C.A AND AR OF THE A SSESSEE ATTENDED AND SUBMITTED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVED INCOME FROM SALARY AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. NO OTHER SOURCES OF INCOME AS ADMITTED. DURING THE STATEMEN T RECORDED U/S 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDDHU, HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE DOES NOT POSSESS STATEMENT OF HIS AC COUNT IN HSBC BANK, GENEVA. DURING THE SEARCH OF LOCKERS IN HSBC IN GU RGAON AND DELHI MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN JOINT WITH HER HUSBAN D SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDDHU, CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 13 LACS WAS FOUND. ST ATEMENT OF SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDDHU WAS RECORDED ON 23/8/2011, U/S 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, WHEREIN SPECIFIC QUESTIONNAIRE REGARDING THE AVAILA BILITY OF THE CASH IN LOCKERS MAINTAINED BY HIM WAS ASKED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 13 LACS TOWARDS THE CASH FOUND IN LOCKER AND TREATE D THE SAME AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, U/S 69A OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO MADE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF CREDIT EN TRIES TOTALING TO RS. 37,99,987/- AND TREATED THE SAME AS INCOME OF THE A SSESSEE FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES AND ADDED THE SAID AMOUNT TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 69 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN MA KING AN ADDITION OF RS. 6,60,000/- OUT OF THE CASH FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEA RCH EVEN THOUGH COMPLETE JUSTIFICATION EXPLANATION FOR THE AVAILABILITY OF C ASH WAS GIVEN. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAD MADE ADDITION U/S 69A OF THE ACT, 1961 ALTHOUGH THE SAID PROVISIONS WAS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE GIVEN FACTS OF THE MATTER AS THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF CASH OF RS. 1300000/- W AS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) 3 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 AT PARA 7 OF HIS ORDER. FURTHER, THE CIT (A) HAD AP PRECIATE THE FACTUAL MATRIX AND FURTHER CONFIRMED/ REPRODUCED THE FOLLOWING FAC TS, BUT AT THE SAME TIME HAS UPHELD THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED C ASH FOUND FROM THE LOCKERS TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 6,60,000/- ON ESTIMATE BASIS. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE REGULAR WITHDRAWALS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, A S THE MONEY REPRESENTED THE INCOME EARNED BY THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE. THE S AVINGS OF THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE RULED OUT FROM THE WITHDRAWALS MADE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME TO MEET OUT HOUSEHOLD AND OTHER EXPENSES. CASH IN HAND (AFT ER MEETING EXPENSES/ DRAWINGS) OF THE ASSESSEE AS AT 31.03.2011 IS RS. 1 883425/- WHICH IS MUCH MORE THAN THE CASH OF RS. 1300000/- FOUND AT THE TI ME OF SEARCH DATED 23.08.2011. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO A REGULAR TAX PAYE R AS SHE WAS EMPLOYED WITH DIAL AND WITH GROUP 4S SERVICES (P) LTD. FROM JAN., 2009 ONWARDS. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT NO OTHER ADVERSE OBSERVATION IN REGARDS TO THE DRAWINGS/ EXPENDITURES INCURRED THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS BY A SSESSEE OR HER FAMILY MEMBERS WERE RECORDED BY THE DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. F URTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS DONE MA IN AVIATION MANAGEMENT AND HAS WORKING EXPE RIENCE OF MORE THAN 20 YEARS. SHE HAD WORKED IN BRITISH AIRWAYS AS CABIN C REW FOR 11 YEARS, THEN AS SENIOR MANAGER AIRPORT WITH M/S. GMR FOR TWO-THREE YEARS AND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH SHE IS DIRECTOR CORPORATE AFFAIRS AND CSR A ND COMMUNICATION WITH M/S. G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS INDIA (P) LTD. HER HUSBAN D IS CA-MBA AND HAS WORKING EXPERIENCE OF MORE THAN 36 YEARS. HE WORKED IN GRIND-LAYS BANK, BARCLAYS BANK AND IN HSBC SECURITIES AND INVESTMENT (P) LTD. AS SR. DIRECTOR. IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THAT THE FAMILY OF THE ASSES SEE COMPRISES OF SELF, HUSBAND AND SCHOOL GOING DAUGHTER. THE SON RESIDES ABROAD FOR STUDIES. HENCE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE CASH BALANCE AVAILABLE W ITH THE FAMILY AND AFORESAID FACTS, THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATION/ MERE REJECTION WITHOUT ASSIGNING REASON IS COMPLETELY UNJUSTIFIED. THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE DECISIONS IN CASE OF ANAND PRAKASH SONI VS. DCIT {101 TTJ 0097} [JOD H] , DCIT VS. VISHWANATH PRASAD GUPTA {57 DTR 0089}[JAB TRIB], ASHWANI KUMAR VS. ITO {39 ITD 4 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 0183}[DEL TRIB], ASHOK CHADDHA VS. ITO {69 DTR 0082 } [DEL], YADU HARI DALMIA VS. CIT{126 ITR 0048} [DEL], CIT VS. PAGARIYA NANDA KISHORE SUWALAJI {79 CCH 0519} [KAR HC], CIT & ANR. VS. S.N. MURALI MOHAN {3 20 ITR 0144} [KAR HC], HARBANS LAI GUPTA VS. ITO {37 TTJ 0636}[DEL TRIB], JCIT VS. BUDH KISHORE {90 TTJ 0410} [DEL TRIB], ITO VS. KARAN MEHRA {40 CCH 0 458} [DEL TRIB]. 5. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CIT(A) HELD AS UNDER:- 4. THE/GROUND NO. 1 IS AGAINST THE ADDITION ON ACC OUNT OF CASH OF RS. 13,00,000/-, FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132 OF THE ACT. 4.1. THE A.O. HAS MADE THE ABOVE ADDITION AND FINDI NGS OF THE A.O. IN ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 143(3) DATED 27.02.2015, ARE R EPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 4. . DURING THE SEARCH OF LOCKERS IN HSBC BANKS IN GURGAON AND DELHI, MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IN JOINT WITH HER HUSBAN D-SHRI RAMAN SINGH, CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 13,00,000/- [RS. 1250000' 500 00] WAS FOUND. STATEMENT OF SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDHU WAS RECORDED ON 23.08.2011 U/S 132(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, WHEREIN A SPECIFIC QU ESTION REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY OF CASH M LOCKERS MAINTAINED BY HIM WA S ASKED. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF HIS STATEMENT IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- Q.6 HAVE YOU OR YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS KEPT ANY DOCUME NT, CASH OR VALUABLE WITH ANY THIRD PARTY INCLUDING SAFE CUSTOD Y FACILITY OF ANY BANK OR AGENCY? IF SO PLEASE FURNISH DETAILS. ANS. I AM HAVING APPROXIMATELY 10-12 LAC CASH IN MY LOCKER NO.D-2000. OUT OF WHICH ONE TO TWO LAC PERTAINS TO MY MOTHER-I N-LAW AND BALANCE RELATES 5 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 TO MY WIFE (RUPINDER DHANOA SIDHU) ', 4.1 DURING THE SEARCH OF LOCKER NO. D-2000, HSBC BANK, GURGAON MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OJ ASSESSEE IN JOINT NAME WITH SHRI RAM AN SINGH SIDHU, CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.12,50,000/- WAS FOUND. AT THE TIME OF THE SEARCH OF THIS LOCKER, STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE- SMT. RUPINDER DH ANOA SIDHU 'WAS RECORDED. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE STATEMENT OF SMT . RUPINDER DHANOA SIDHU DATED 01.10.2011 IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- Q: 4. ON SEARCH OF LOCKER NO. D-2000, CASH AMOUNTIN G TO RS. 12,50,000/- (RS. TWELVE LAKHS FIFTY THOUSANDS ONLY) HAS BEEN FOUND. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THIS CASH. ANS: THIS CASH BELONGS TO ME. THIS IS ACCUMULATED O VER A PERIOD OF TIME FROM SAVINGS. APART FROM THIS, THIS CASH ALSO INCLUDES S AVINGS FROM MY EXPENSES AND MONEY RECEIVED ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS LI KE BIRTH DAY ON MY CHILDREN ETC. Q:5. KINDLY PRODUCE THE NECESSARY EVIDENTIARY PROOF IN YOUR CONTENTION IN QUESTION NO. 4. ANS: - RIGHT NOW, I CANNOT PRODUCE ANY SUCH PROOF. BUT I W ANT TO STATE THAT THIS SAVINGS IS MADE BY ME FROM THE ACCUMULATED INC OME. THE COPIES OF RELEVANT IIRS WILL MIN* PRODUCED IN DUE COURSE. 4.2 DURING THE SEARCH OF LOCKER NO. E-722, HSBC BANK, S OUTH EXT., NEW DELHI MAINTAINED IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE IN JOINT NAME WI TH SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDHU, CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 50,000/- WAS FOUND. AT THE TIME OF THE SEARCH OF THIS LOCKER, STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE - SMT. RUPINDER DHANOA SIDHU WAS RECORDED: THE RELEVANT PART OF THE STATEMENT OF SMT RUPMDER DHANOA SIDHU DATED 07./0.207/ IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- Q: 3 ON SEARCHING THE LOCKER NO. E-722, THE FOLLOW ING ITEMS HAVE BEEN FOUND: 6 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 I) GOLD JEWELLERY WEIGHING 8 7 1.400GM WORTH RS.23,45,016/- (AS PER VALUATION REPORT DATED 12.10.2011. II) CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.50,000/-. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF ABOVE. ANS. ............. FURTHER I WANT TO STATE THAT THE CASH OF RS.50,000/ - IS RECEIVED AS SHAGUN ON AUSPICIOUS OCCASIONS . 4.3 FROM THE STATEMENTS OF SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDHU AS WE LL AS OF SMT RUPINDER DHANOA SIDHU, AS REPRODUCED ABOVE, IT IS C LEAR ESTABLISHED BEYOND ANY IOTA OF DOUBT THAT CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKERS BE LONGED TO MRS. 7?WPM7ER DHANOA SIDHU ONLY. VIDE NOTICE U/S 142(1) DATED 15.12.2014, THE ASSESS EE WAS ASKED CASH OF RS. 72,50,000/- AND RS.50,000/- WAS FOUND IN LOCKER NO. D-2000 AND LOCKER NO. E-722 OF IISBC BANK, GURGAON AND DELHI RESPECTI VELY. THE CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKERS HAS BEEN OWNED BY YOU. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKERS ALONGWITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN RE SPONSE ASSESSEE'S WRITTEN REPLY DATED NIL WAS RECEIVED WHEREIN NO SPECIFIC RE PLY HAS BEEN FUNDSH RATHER SIMPLY STATED THAT THE CASH OF FO.72,5'0,000/- AND RS.50,000/- FOUND FROM LOCKERS REPRESENTED MY SAVINGS OVER THE YEARS OUT O F CASH WITHDRAWN. 4.4 THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PERUSED BUT FOU ND NOT TENABLE. SHE IN HER STATEMENTS REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE HAD STATED T HAT CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKERS REPRESENTS HER PAST SAVINGS AND MONEY RECEI VED ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS LIKE BIRTH DAY OF HER CHILDREN. IN HER WRITTEN REPL Y REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE, SHE AGAIN STATED THAT THE CASH OF RS.12,50,000/- AN D RS.50,000/- FOUND FROM LOCKERS REPRESENTED HER SAVINGS OVER THE YEARS OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN. 4.5 IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE ASSESSEE'S THAT THE CASH FO UND IN LOCKERS IS SAVINGS OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN, HER BANK STATEMENTS IN STAND ARD CHARTERED BANK AND DEUSTCHE BANK FOR THE FY 2005-06 TO 2011-12 WERE VE RIFIED AND IT WAS 7 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 NOTICED THAT IN THESE YEARS SHE WITHDREW CASH OF RS . 15,000/-FROM STANDARD CHARTERED BANK ON 11.09.2007 AND DEPOSITED RS.25,00 0/- IN STANDARD CHARTERED BANK ON 28.04.2009. HENCE THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT WITHDRAWN ANY CASH FROM HER BANK ACCOUNTS DURING THE LAST 7 YEARS, WHICH COULD BE AVAILABLE WITH HER. THUS THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSES SEE AS WELL AS HER EXPLANATION IN THE WRITTEN REPLY THAT THE CASH FOUN D REPRESENTS HER SAVINGS OUT OF WITHDRAWALS IS FALSE AND INCORRECT ON THE FA CE OF RECORDS ITSELF. REGARDING ASSESSEE. S PLEA OF HAVING RECEIVED GIFTS ON BIRTHDAY OF CHILDREN AND SHAGUNS ON AUSPICIOUS OCCASIONS, IT MAY BE ADDE D HERE THAT CUSTOM OF GIFTS/SHAGUNS PREVAILS IN OUR SOCIETY BUT ARE RECIP ROCAL AND CANNOT BE A SOURCE OF ACCUMULATION OF SUCH A HUGE AMOUNT. ACCOR DINGLY THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE SOURCE OF CASH FOUND IN HER LOCKERS. 4.6 IN VIEW OF THE DETAILED DISCUSSION ABOVE, THE CASH FOUND IN LOCKERS AMOUNTING TO RS. 13,00,000/- IS TREATED AS THE UNAC COUNTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 69 A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND A DDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSE E IS LIABLE FOR PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271 AAA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 WITH REGARDS TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 13,00,000/- AS DETAIFUL ABOVE, AND ACCORDINGLY PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE BEING INITIATED SEPARATELY BY THE I SSUE OF NOTICE U/S 274 OF THE ACT. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LD. A.R. HAS FILE D WRITTEN SUBMISSION VIDE LETTER 15.6.2015, WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- GROUND NO.L THE LEARNED DCIT HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS. 1300000 O N ACCOUNT OF CASH FOUND IN LOCKERS DURING THE SEARCH. HE HAS BASED HI S DECISION TO MAKE THE ADDITION ON THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED DURING THE SEARCH WHERE IN THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSERTED THAT THE CASH FOUND IN LOCKERS REPRESENTED HER SAVINGS OVER THE YEARS OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN. THE A SSESSEE HAD VIDE HER LETTER DATED 26 TH DEC. 2014 GIVEN DETAILED JUSTIFICATION OF CASH FOU ND. THE 8 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 ASSESSEE HAD ATTACHED THE DETAILS OF CASH WITHDRAWN DURING THE LAST SEVEN ASSESSMENT YEARS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSES SEE HELD JOINTLY WITH HER HUSBAND AND UTILIZATION OF THE SAME GIVING THE CASH IN HAND AT THE END OF EACH YEAR. A COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE IS E NCLOSED FOR YOUR READY REFERENCE WITH THE CASH FLOW CHART SUBMITTED TO THE DCIT. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE SAME THAT THE CASH IN THE HAND OF THE ASSESSEE AS AT 31.03.2011 IS RS. 1883425 WHICH IS MUCH MORE THAN THE CASH OF RS. 130 0000 FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. THE LEARNED DCIT WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION HAS IGNORED THE VITAL POINT THAT THE ACCOUNTS FROM WHERE THE CASH I N WITHDRAWN ARE THE ACCOUNTS IN THE JOINT NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND HER HUSBAND AND THE CASH, FOUND REPRESENTED THE CASH IN THE HANDS OF BOTH OF THEM AS A FAMILY. THE FAMILY OUT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPRISES OF SELF, HUSBAND AND SCHOOL GOING DAUGHTER. THE SON RESIDES ABROAD FOR STUDIES. HENCE KEEPING IN VIEW THE CASH BALANCE AVAILABLE WITH THE FAMILY OUT OF CASH WITHDRAWN FROM BANKS OVER THE LAST SEVEN YEARS NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH UND DURING THE SEARCH IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS. MADE BY THE LEARNED DCIT NEEDS TO BE DELETED. 4.3. FINDINGS ON GROUND NO. 1 :THE FINDINGS ARE AS UNDER:- 4 . 4. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED ASSESSMENT ORDER, WRITT EN SUBMISSIONS AND ORAL ARGUMENTS OF LD. AR. THE OBJECTIONS/ARGUM ENTS OF THE APPELLANT ARE DISCUSSED AS UNDER: - (I) THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT CASH FOUND IN BOTH T HE LOCKERS, BELONGS TO HER. HOWEVER, IN THE STATEMENT OF HER HUSBAND, SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDHU, HE HAS STATED THAT RS 1 TO 7 LAC BELONGS TO MY MOTHER- IN-LAW AND BALANCE RELATES TO MY WIFE I.E. THE APPELLANT (II) THE LOCKERS IN HSBC BANK IN GURGAON AND DELHI, ARE IN THE JOINT NAME OF THE APPELLANT WITH HER HUSBAND, SHRI RAMAN SINGH SI DHU. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4), THE APPELLANT HAS STATED THAT CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKERS, BELONGS TO HER. WHICH HAS BEEN ACCUMULATED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME 9 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 FROM PAST SAVINGS AND ALSO RECEIVED US SHAGUN GIFTS ON AUSPICIOUS OCCASIONS. (III) DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPE LLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CASH WITHDRAWAL STATEMENT BEFORE THE A.O. WAS FILED VIDE LETTER DATED 26.12.2014, WHERE THE ACCUMULATED CASH BALANCE OVER A PERIOD OF TIME HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS 18,66,000/ AND THEREFORE, SUBMITTE D THAT CASH OF RS. 13,00,000/-, FOUND FROM THE LOCKERS, IS FULLY EXPLA INED. HOWEVER, THIS ARGUMENT OF THE APPELLANT DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE A.O FOR THE REASON THAT SHE HAS NOT MADE REGULAR WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH ARE IN THE JOINT NAME WITH HER HUSBAND. (IV) IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT HA S REITERATED MORE OR LESS SAME ARGUMENT; WHICH WERE TAKEN BEFORE THE A.O., IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE BA NK ACCOUNTS FROM WHERE CASH HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN, ARE THE ACCOUNTS IN THE JO IN NAME OF THE APPELLANT AND HER HUSBAND AND THEREFORE, CASH FOUND REPRESENT THE CASH IN THE HANDS OF BOTH OF THEM AS A FAMILY. HOWEVER, IN THE STATEMENT, HER HUSBAND SHRI RAMAN SINGI SIDHU, HAS STATED THAT THE CASH FOUND FROM THE LOCKERS BELONG TO HIS WIFE AND MOTHER-IN-LAW, AND T HEREFORE, THE ARGUMENT OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE WITHDRAWAL FROM THE JOINT BA NK ACCOUNTS REPRESENTS THE CASH IN THE HANDS OF BOTH OF THEM AS THE FAMILY . FROM THE ABOVE, THE FOLLOWING FACTS EMERGES: (A) CASH OF RS. 1 TO 2 LACS BELONGS TO THE MOTHER OF T HE APPELLANT, AS STATED BY SHRI RAMAN SINGH SIDHU IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED U/ S 132(4). HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT HAS DENIED ABOUT THE CASH BELONGING TO HE R MOTHER, OUT OF THE CASH FOUND FROM THE LOCKERS AND THE APPELLANT HAS OWNED UP THE CASH FOUND FROM BOTH THE LOCKERS, AS BELONGING TO HER ONLY. THEREFO RE, I HOLD THAT NO CASH OUT OF RS. 13,00,000/-, BELONGS TO THE MOTHER OF THE APPEL LANT. (B) FROM THE JOINT BANK ACCOUNTS, THE REGULAR WITHDRAW ALS HAVE BEEN SHOWN OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN THE SE JOINT ACCOUNTS IS FROM THE 10 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 INCOME EARNED BY THE HUSBAND OF THE APPELLANT. HOWE VER, TO MEET OUT THE HOUSEHOLD AND OTHER EXPENSE, THE WITHDRAWALS MADE O VER A PERIOD OF TIME, THE SAVING BY THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE RULED OUT. C) IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT HERSELF IS ALSO A REGULAR TAX PAYER. SHE WAS EMPLOYED WITH DIAL (DELHI AIRPORT INTERNATI ONAL (P) LTD.) AND WITH GROUP 4S SERVICES (P) LTD. FROM JANUARY, 2009 ONWAR DS. THEREFORE, IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, ON ESTIMATE BASIS CASH SAV INGS OF APPROXIMATELY AND UPTO RS. 1,00,000/- PER ANNUM, CAN BE CONSIDERE D IN HER HANDS. ACCORDINGLY, I HOLD THAT IN THE PAST 6 ASSESSMENT Y EARS AND UPTO THE DATE OF SEARCH I.E. 23.8.201 1, CASH OF RS. 6,40,000/-(RS. 6,00,000/- + RS. 40,000/-) ON ACCOUNT OF PAST SAVINGS, SHAGUN/GIFT ON AUSPICIO US OCCASIONS ETC., IS CONSIDERED AS EXPLAINED, OUT OF THE TOTAL CASH FOUN D FROM BOTH THE LOCKERS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 6,40,000/-, IS HEREBY DELETED AND REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 6,60,000/-, IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 1, IS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A DETAILED FINDING IN CONFIRM ING THE PARTIAL ADDITION. THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERFERE WITH THE SAME. THE CA SE LAWS WHICH WERE RELIED BY THE LD. AR ARE HAVING DISTINGUISHING FACTS AS IN TH E PRESENT CASE, THE AMOUNT WAS FOUND IN THE BANK LOCKER OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS JOINT ACCOUNT ALONG WITH HER HUSBAND AND NO PROPER EXPLANATION OR EVIDE NCE WAS PROVIDED FOR THE AMOUNT WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). IN FACT, THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A PROPER PARTIAL RELIEF AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE AMOUNTS WHICH WERE GIFTED TO THE CHILD OF THE ASSESSEE ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AND ALSO AS SHAGUN TO HER FROM CERTAIN OCCASIONS. THERE IS NOTHING NEW MATERIAL S HOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS REGARDS THE CASH FOUND IN THE LOCKER. THUS, THE CIT (A) HAS CORRECTLY CONFIRMED THE PARTIAL ADDITION TO RS. 6,60,000/-. THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL DOES NOT SURVIVE. 11 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 8. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH NOVEMBER, 2018 . SD/- SD/- (N. K. BILLAIYA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 28/11/2018 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 12 ITA NO. 146/DEL/2016 DATE OF DICTATION 22 .1 1 .2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 26 .11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS 28 .11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 28.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 28.11.2018 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK