The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 0464 (Tela-HC)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 68

Assessee having admitted that he was also doing real estate business and was also having rental income, and by not furnishing any details of the same assessee could not blame AO or the Tribunal for drawing conclusion that his source of money for making deposits other than agricultural income, was unexplained. No error of law had been committed by AO or CIT(A) or the Tribunal in treating a portion of unexplained deposits as income of assessee and there was no question of law, much less substantial question of law, arising from the facts of the case warranting interference under section 260A.

Income from undisclosed sources - Under section 68 - Cash deposits in bank account - Assessee not furnishing any details

AO required assessee to explain cash deposits of Rs. 83 lakhs in his bank acount. Assessee submitted that cash deposits were made out of sale proceeds of agricultural produce of the land. AO allowed relief to the extent of Rs. 30 lakhs and taxed remaining amount as unexplained credit under section 8. While doing this, AO referred to the sworn statement made by assessee before ITO (Inv.) that cash deposits were from real estate business and thus, AO took the view version of assessee that all the amounts deposited in bank account was solely from agricultural income could not be accepted. Tribunal upheld this. Assessee approached High Court. Held: Assessee did not submit any details of crops sold and income received out of agricultural pursuits, and thus attempt of assessee to justify Rs. 53 lakhs 50 as agricultural income was not supported by evidence. Having admitted that he was also doing real estate business and was also having rental income, and by not furnishing any details of the same assessee could not blame AO or the Tribunal for drawing conclusion that his source of money for making deposits other than agricultural income, was unexplained. No error of law had been committed by AO or CIT(A) or the Tribunal in treating a portion of unexplained deposits as income of assessee and there was no question of law, much less substantial question of law, arising from the facts of the case warranting interference under section 260A. Appeal dismissed.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assessee.

A.Y. : 2009-10 & 2010-11



IN THE TELANGANA HIGH COURT

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT