Sunil Mathur v. ITO (2022) 93 ITR 86 (Jaipur)(Trib.)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Cash deposit in bank-Past withdrawals-Household withdrawals explained-Addition is held to be not valid.

Held that the assessee had explained the source of cash deposits as being withdrawals made in the previous two years and cash in the hand at the beginning of the year, in support of which the assessee had submitted the cash book and cash-flow statement for the previous two financial years. The statements sufficiently explained not only the source of deposits by way of salary and other retirement benefits, which had been duly declared, but also withdrawals towards household expenses, which were partly funded by him and partly by his wife. Therefore, as availability of cash in hand at the beginning of the year was also sufficiently explained. Addition is directed to be deleted. (AY.2014-15)