ITAT Upholds CIT(A) Order Confirming Addl Rs. 4.99 Lakh As Unexplained Cash In Muthoot Group MD’s Bank Accounts [Read Order]

In George Alexander vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has dismissed an appeal filed by the assessee, managing director of the Muthoot Group, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). The issue raised in the appeal was whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,99,287 as unexplained credits or deposits in various bank accounts of the assessee.The relevant assessment year is 1996-97 and the assessee had declared a total income of Rs. 9,00,591. However, the assessing officer (AO) completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, making an addition of Rs. 4,99,287. The addition, according to the AO, was warranted since there were deposits made in different bank accounts of the assessee, which were not satisfactorily explained. The assessee was found to have received dividends from various companies which should have been routed through his bank account. Therefore, the AO found that the only way to determine what would be the income of the assessee is by totalling all the deposits in the bank, excluding deposits not representing income, and deducting therefrom all income declared by the assessee that can be said to have been routed through the bank and treating it as the income of the assessee.Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee approached the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee raised the contention that the credits in the bank accounts are nothing but either the deposits made in his name by the firm wherein he is partner or interest accrued on fixed deposits made by the sister concerns. However, the CIT(A) rejected the contentions of the assessee and found that the AO, during the course of working out the unaccounted income, had excluded those deposits which cannot be treated as unaccounted income such as loan availed, deposits made on behalf of sister concerns and interest earned thereon, income which was already declared but still could be routed through bank etc. On rejection of appeal by the CIT(A), the assessee had filed the present appeal before the ITAT.Hearing the parties, the ITAT held the following:“While working out the unexplained deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee, the Assessing Officer had given due credit to the income declared by the assessee in the return of income filed. The Assessing Officer has also given credit to the deposits not representing income such as loan from Canfin, LIC maturity amount etc. The unexplained credits/deposits in the various bank accounts calculated by the Assessing Officer which was confirmed by the CIT(A), has not been dispelled by the assessee by placing any contra material/evidence. Since there is no contra evidence or material placed by the assessee, the unexplained deposits/credits in the bank accounts of the assessee amounting to Rs. 4,99,287/- calculated by the Assessing Officer is confirmed. It is ordered accordingly.”Thus, the ITAT confirmed the order of the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.Read the Order Here

ITAT Upholds CIT(A) Order Confirming Addl Rs. 4.99 Lakh As Unexplained Cash In Muthoot Group MD’s Bank Accounts [Read Order]

Ammu Charles

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

ITAT Upholds CIT(A) Order Confirming Addl Rs. 4.99 Lakh As Unexplained Cash In Muthoot Group MD’s Bank Accounts [Read Order]

Ammu Charles

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers