IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT . ., . / ITA NO.874/PUN/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI RAJENDRA P. PATNI, A-604, AKASHGANGA BUILDING, ROHATANI, AUNDH ANNEXURE, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA 411017 PAN : ACYPP5676M VS. ITO, WARD-10(3), PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSE D BY THE CIT(A)-8, PUNE ON 29-01-2018 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.9.00 LAKH TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. APPELLANT BY SHRI HARI KRISHAN RESPONDENT BY SHRI VISHWAS MUNDE DATE OF HEARING 24-07-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25-07-2019 ITA NO.874/PUN/2018 SHRI RAJENDRA P. PATNI 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.9.00 LAKH IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF SUCH DEPOSIT, THE ASSES SEE STATED THAT A SUM OF RS.5,20,000/- WAS EARLIER WITHDRAWN FR OM THE SAME BANK ACCOUNT, WHICH WAS RE-DEPOSITED. AS REGAR DS THE REMAINING AMOUNT, THE ASSESSEE GAVE SOME EXPLANATION ABOUT HAVING RECEIVED SOME GIFT RECEIVED FROM HIS DAUGHTER-IN-LAW . NOT CONVINCED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) MADE ADDITION OF RS.9.00 LAC, WHICH CAME TO BE SUSTAINED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND GONE THROUGH THE RELE VANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE BANK PA SSBOOK IN WHICH THE SAID SUM OF RS.9.00 LAKH WAS DEPOSITED. ON P ERUSAL OF THE SAID PASSBOOK, IT IS DISCERNIBLE THAT THE ASSESSEE WITHD REW CASH OF RS.2.00 LAKH ON 29-03-2008; RS.2,50,000/- ON 02-04-2008; AND RS.70,000/- ON 05-04-2008. DEPOSITS IN THE BANK WHICH HAVE BEEN ADDED BY THE AO ARE RS.1,50,000/ - ON 15-05-2008 AND RS.7,50,000/- ON 16-05-2008. THUS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THERE IS HARDLY A DIFFERENCE OF LESS THAN TWO MONTHS IN THE AMOUNT OF WITHDRAWALS FROM THE BANK AND RE-DEPOSITS. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE AO THAT THE AMOUNTS WITHDRAWN AMOUNTING TO ITA NO.874/PUN/2018 SHRI RAJENDRA P. PATNI 3 RS.5,20,000/- WERE SPENT ELSEWHERE. ONCE A PARTICULAR A MOUNT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN WHICH HAS NOT BEEN SPENT ANYWHERE, AN D IF A FURTHER DEPOSIT IS MADE, THE ARGUMENT OF THE RE-DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT CANNOT BE RULED OUT WITHOUT ANY OTHER COGENT CONTRARY MATERIAL. IN THE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE SUCCESSFULLY EXPLAINED THE SOURCE OF CASH D EPOSIT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT TO THE TUNE OF RS.5,20,000/-. THE ADD ITION TO THIS EXTENT IS, ERGO, DELETED. 5. NO ARGUMENT WAS ADVANCED BY THE LD. AR WITH REGARD TO THE REMAINING ADDITION. THUS, THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT OF ADDITIO N OF RS.3,80,000/- IS HELD TO HAVE BEEN RIGHTLY SUSTAINED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JULY, 2019. SD/- (R.S.SYAL) / VICE PRESIDENT PUNE; DATED : 25 TH JULY, 2019 ITA NO.874/PUN/2018 SHRI RAJENDRA P. PATNI 4 / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (APPEALS)-8, PUNE 4. THE PR.CIT-5, PUNE 5. , , SMC / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 24-07-2019 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 24-07-2019 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER -- JM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. -- JM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7. DATE OF UPLOADING ORDER SR.PS 8. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 10. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE A.R. 11. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *