Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: cpt :: TDS :: VAT RATES :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: form 3cd :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: empanelment :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: due date for vat payment :: VAT Audit
« From the Courts »
  Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 DCIT vs. Shivshankar R. Sharma (ITAT Mumbai)
 ACIT vs. Jawaharlal Agicha (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. M/s. D. Chetan & Co (Bombay High Court)
 Makes further amendments to Notification no. 157/90-Customs dated 28th March, 1990 regarding temporary admission under the ATA Carnet
 Appointment of Common Adjudicating Authority by DGRI - 2/2016-Customs
 ransfers Of Hon’ble Members Of The ITAT (September 2016)
 M. G. Contractors Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 Haryana State Road & Bridges Development Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (P&H High Court)
 Dharamshibhai Sonani vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Shri Nuruddin B. Ajani, 11-A, Aliabad Aga Hall, Nesbit Road, Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010 Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -20, Mumbai
July, 13th 2015
                         MUMBAI BENCH "B", MUMBAI


                                  ITA No.1983/M/2013
                                Assessment Year: 2009-10

           Shri Nuruddin B. Ajani,              Dy. Commissioner of Income
           11-A, Aliabad Aga Hall,              Tax,
           Nesbit Road, Mazgaon,                Central Circle -20,
           Mumbai ­ 400 010                     Mumbai
           PAN: AACPA 0161A
                (Appellant)                         (Respondent)

      Present for:
      Assessee by                    : Shri Rakesh Joshi, A.R.
      Revenue by                     : Dr. Yogesh Kamat, D.R.

      Date of Hearing                : 02.06.2015
      Date of Pronouncement          : 10.07.2015


Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

      The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order
dated 17.01.2013 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter
referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.

2.    The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:
      "1.      On the fact and circumstances of the case as well as in Law, the Learned
               CT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Learned Assessing Officer
               in making an addition of income amounting to Rs.8,30,780/- on
               account of alleged negative peak cash balance, without
               considering the facts & circumstances of the case.

      2.       On the fact and circumstances of the case as well as in Law, the Learned
               CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the appellant
               had received the said sum in inheritance from his deceased parents,
               without considering the facts El circumstances of the case.

      3.       On the fact and circumstances of the case as well as in Law, the Learned
               CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the said cash balance was
                                          2                            ITA No.1983/M/2013
                                                                      Shri Nuruddin B. Ajani

             considered in the hand of appellant, in Wealth Tax assessments for various

      4.     The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the
             said ground of appeal."

3.    The brief facts of the case are that during the assessment proceedings,
the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) observed that cash
deposits aggregating to Rs.8,57,000/- were found having been deposited over
the period from 27.06.08 to 26.03.09. The AO noted that at the same time the
cash book of the assessee showed negative cash balance. He therefore inferred
that cash deposits were from undisclosed sources. On being asked to explain
in this respect by the AO, the assessee submitted that an amount of Rs.10 lakh
was bequeathed by his deceased parents in cash and the said entry had
remained to be passed in the books which in turn lead to the negative cash
balance. The AO directed the assessee to furnish the details in this respect e.g.
copy of the will of the father and mother of the assessee, a copy of the
statement of accounts of the assessee, copies of the returns of income of the
deceased parents of the assessee, source of cash in the hands of deceased
parents and their wealth tax returns etc. The assessee furnished certain details.
After examination of the relevant documents, the AO observed that the assets
transferred by will have not been accounted for in the statement of accounts of
the assessee for the respective years. The source of cash in the hand of the
deceased parents of the assessee was not explained. In view of the above, the
AO held that the cash deposits were not satisfactorily explained. He therefore
added to the return of the income the negative peak cash balance of

4.    Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee furnished certain details such as
bank statements etc. to show that the amount was in fact withdrawn on
different dates from the joint account of the assessee with his father and the
                                       3                          ITA No.1983/M/2013
                                                                 Shri Nuruddin B. Ajani

same was subsequently deposited in the accounts of assessee on different
dates. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that the dates of withdrawal from the joint
account and the deposit date of different accounts in the account of assessee
were different, hence it cannot be said that the source of cash deposit was the
bequeathed amount from the deceased parents.          He therefore upheld the

5.    Before us, the Ld. A.R. of the assessee has submitted that the amount in
question was bequeathed by his deceased parents. He has invited our attention
to the copy of the will placed at page 1 to 3 of the paper book. He, while
relying upon the statements of his father namely Late Shri Badruddin Hussein
Ajani, has submitted that the total cash available with his father was of
Rs.84,36,560/- which was shown to be withdrawn from the banks on different
dates. He has further invited our attention to the wealth tax return filed by the
assessee for A.Y. 2007-08 wherein the AO has accepted the submission of the
assessee that cash of Rs.10 lakh was received by the assessee from his
deceased parents as per the will though the same has been accepted without
prejudice to the Department's stand in the Income Tax proceedings. After
considering the submissions of the assessee, we find that the assessee on the
record has produced the bank statements which show that the assessee's father
was having sufficient cash balance in his accounts. It is also not disputed that
the father of the assessee has bequeathed his movable and immovable
properties in favour of the assessee. Merely because, the date of withdrawals
from the account of father and the date of deposits of the amount in the
accounts of the assessee differ that itself is not sufficient to hold that the
assessee has no explanation regarding the source of cash in his bank account.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we do not think it
a case of no explanation of source of deposits in the bank account of the
                                              4                          ITA No.1983/M/2013
                                                                        Shri Nuruddin B. Ajani

assessee. The additions, thus, in our view, are not warranted in this case and
the same are accordingly ordered to be deleted.

6.       In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed.

                  Order pronounced in the open court on 10.07.2015.

          Sd/-                                                   Sd/-
    (G.S. Pannu)                                            (Sanjay Garg)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                       JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 10.07.2015.
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.

Copy to: The Appellant
        The Respondent
        The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
        The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai
        The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//                             [

                                                  By Order

                                 Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Custom Software Development Outsourcing Custom Software Development Offshore Cus

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions