DEVARAJULU NATARAJAN, COIMBATORE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORP WARD 1, , COIMBATORE

ITA 318/CHNY/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6826 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 69; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C/SMC” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी मनोज कु मार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद) के सम*। HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.318/Chny/2022 (िनधा3रण वष3 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Devarajulu Natarajan 76/3, Annamalayar Garden, Thekkupalayam Post, Periyanaickenpalayam, Coimbatore – 641 020. बनाम/ V s . ITO Corporate Ward-1, Coimbatore, थायी लेखा सं. /जीआइ आर सं. /P AN / G I R No . AB W P N- 2 3 0 7 - C (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri N. Arjunraj (CA) for S. Sridhar (Advocate) – Ld. AR थ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Da te of Hea ring : 15-09-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 15-09-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 21.03.2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 30.09.2019. The grievance of the assessee is confirmation of certain addition of Rs.8.50 Lacs which ITA No.318/Chny/2022 - 2 - represent cash deposit in Bank Accounts. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2. The assessee admitted income of Rs.6.82 Lacs which include salary income and the case was subjected to scrutiny to verify cash deposited by assessee during demonetization period. The cash deposit during demonetized period was Rs.8.50 Lacs. The assessee stated to have sourced it from amount returned by friends and relatives out of money given to them during past several years out of salary income. However, these details could not be filed by the assessee. The salary was directly credited though banking channels. Accordingly, Ld. AO added entire cash deposit of Rs.12.85 Lacs u/s 69 which include deposit made before demonetization period also. 3. The Ld. CIT(A), noted that post demonetization, cash deposited in State Bank of Hyderabad was only Rs.2.50 Lacs and cash deposited in Canara bank was Rs.6 Lacs only. Accordingly, the addition was restricted to Rs.8.50 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity before lower authorities to substantiate the source of cash deposit. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee could not establish the source of deposit and therefore, the additions are justified. Having considered factual matrix, I am of the opinion that the onus is on assessee to substantiate the source of cash deposit of Rs.8.50 Lacs. Considering the pleadings made by Ld. AR, I deem it fit to grant another opportunity to assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. AO. Accordingly, the issue is restored back to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to assessee to substantiate the source of deposit. ITA No.318/Chny/2022 - 3 - 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 15 th September, 2022. Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे+ई / Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 15-09-2022 JPV JPVJPV JPV आदेश की Iितिलिप अ "ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF