Case Note & Summary
The appellant, G. Shubha Devi, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated 09/10/2015 in ITA No.1139/Bang/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. The dispute arose from the assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bengaluru, which added an amount of Rs.5,07,900/- as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Act. The appellant had deposited this amount in cash in her bank account during the demonetization period. She claimed that the cash was from her past savings, but she did not provide any satisfactory evidence to support this claim. The Assessing Officer rejected her explanation and treated the deposit as unexplained income. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the ITAT upheld the addition. The appellant then appealed to the High Court, arguing that the lower authorities erred in not accepting her explanation. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the concurrent findings of fact by the lower authorities were based on evidence and did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The court noted that the onus was on the assessee to prove the source of the cash deposit, and she failed to discharge that onus. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Income Tax - Unexplained Cash Deposit - Section 69A of Income Tax Act, 1961 - Onus of Proof - The assessee deposited Rs.5,07,900/- in cash during the demonetization period and claimed it was from past savings. The Assessing Officer added the amount as unexplained income under Section 69A. The CIT(A) and ITAT confirmed the addition. The High Court held that the assessee failed to discharge the onus to prove the source of cash, and the concurrent findings of fact did not give rise to any substantial question of law. (Paras 1-5) B) Income Tax - Substantial Question of Law - Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 - Scope of Appeal - The High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 260-A, can only entertain appeals involving substantial questions of law. The court found that the findings of fact by the lower authorities were based on evidence and did not warrant interference. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the addition of Rs.5,07,900/- as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was justified when the assessee claimed the amount was from past savings but failed to provide satisfactory evidence.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that no substantial question of law arises. The addition of Rs.5,07,900/- as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was confirmed.
Law Points
- Section 69A of Income Tax Act
- 1961
- unexplained cash deposits
- onus of proof
- burden on assessee
- demonetization
- cash credit
- Section 260-A of Income Tax Act
