Shri Rajnikant Narendrabhai Patel, ... vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4,, Anand on 28 September, 2018
7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record.
On scrutiny the assessing officer has noticed cash deposit of Rs. 25,64,900/-
and Rs. 1979200/- in bank a/c. no. 457010100083793 and bank a/c no.
457010100026406 with the Axis Bank held by the assesse jointly with his wife
and other a/c jointly with his son. The assessee was to explain the source of
various cash deposited in the aforesaid bank a/cs. The assessee explained in a
general manner that the impugned cash was borrowed from friends and relatives
for the purpose of obtaining visa for the study of his son. On failing to
substantiate the source of cash deposit, the assessee has requested the
assessing officer to compute the tax liability by computing the peak credit of all
his accounts. Therefore, the assessing officer has worked out the peak cash
deposit in the aforesaid bank accounts to the amount of Rs. 12,65,151/-. Before
the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has claimed receipt of cash deposits from 10
I.T.A No. 61/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 Page No 5
Rajnikant Narendrabhai Patel vs. ITO
persons but he could not establish the creditworthiness of same persons with
relevant supporting material. The ld. CIT(A) has sustained the addition made by
the assessing officer as the assessee has failed to prove the source of sum
deposits. Regarding ground of appeal of the assessee pertaining to not allowing
the action of peak cash credit of Rs. 5,98,487/- made by the assessing officer in
assessment year 2009-10 and in respect of salary of Rs. 227389/- during the
previous year credited in his bank. In this connection, we have perused the
material on record and find that these two issues raised by the assesse has not
been adjudicated with specifically in the orders of assessing officer and the ld.
CIT(A). Therefore, we consider it appropriate to restore these two issues to the
file of assessing officer to decide a afresh after examination/verification of the
relevant materials and after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.