Smt. Sanjukta Singh, Cuttack V. ITO Ward-2(30, Cuttack

ITA 258/CTK/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4106 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 03-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.C.MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: S S.N.SAHUSOMNATH SAHU; ARS
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE Smt. Sanjukta Singh, Samanta Sahi, B.K.Canal Road, Cuttack PAN/GIR No. (Appellant This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, Cuttack/10125/018 2. S/Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahu, ARs appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is deriving the sale of garment materials, house property income and interest income. It was the submission that the return filed by the there was substantial cash deposits in her bank accounts. The Assessing Officer had accepted IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL ITA No.258/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Smt. Sanjukta Singh, Samanta Sahi, B.K.Canal Road, Cuttack-753001 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(3), Cuttack PAN/GIR No.AQGPS 9627 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : S/Shri S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahu, ARs Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Date of Hearing : 12/0 Date of Pronouncement : 12/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld A), NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.6.2023 in Appeal No. Cuttack/10125/018-19 for the assessment year 2016- S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahu, ARs appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is deriving the sale of garment materials, house property income and interest income. It was the submission that the return filed by the came to be processed as there was substantial cash deposits in her bank accounts. The Assessing Officer had accepted the fact that the assessee’s husband’s transactions Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , CUTTACK JUDICIAL MEMBER Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3), Cuttack Respondent) S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahu, ARs : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR 03/2024 /03/2024 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No.CIT(A), -17. S.N.Sahu/Somnath Sahu, ARs appeared for the assessee and It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is deriving income from the sale of garment materials, house property income and interest income. came to be processed as there was substantial cash deposits in her bank accounts. The Assessing the fact that the assessee’s husband’s transactions ITA No.258/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page2 | 3 were reflected in the assessee’s bank accounts. It was the submission that the total cash deposits in the assessee’s account was to an extent of Rs.1,25,40,900/-. It was the submission that out of entire cash deposits, the Assessing Officer disbelieved the cash deposits to an extent of Rs.24,28,734/- representing cash gift received from the assessee’s mother of Rs.2,00,000/- , assessee’s father-in-law of Rs.7,80,000/- , assessee’s mother-in-law of Rs.4,25,000/- and minor children of Rs.7,76,500/-,which they received on various occasions and personal cash savings of Rs.2,48,200/-. It was the submission that on appeal, the ld CIT(A) had accepted the claim of the assessee of personal cash savings of Rs.2,48,200/-and the balance of Rs.24,28,734/- was confirmed. It was the submission that the assessee has received above gifts mentioned above and filed the affidavits to substantiate the claim. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. I have heard the rival submissions. The ld AR was specifically asked to show any proof that the assessee was maintaining cash in hand to which ld AR was unable to substantiate with any proof, As there was no evidence available to substantiate its claim that the assessee or the donees were maintaining cash in hand, though the assessee has produced affidavits and has given plausible explanation, same cannot be accepted. Consequently, the addition as made by the AO and confirmed by ld CIT(A), stands confirmed. ITA No.258/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page3 | 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/03/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 12 /03/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Smt. Sanjukta Singh, Samanta Sahi, B.K.Canal Road, Cuttack- 753001 2. The Respondent: Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(3), Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//