Facts of the
Case
During assessment proceedings, the Assessing
Officer examined the financial records and bank transactions of the assessee,
Rajesh Bajaj. Certain deposits and credits were considered not satisfactorily
explained.
The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee
failed to establish the nature and source of the funds with adequate
documentary evidence. Accordingly, additions were made treating the amounts as
unexplained income under the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act.
The assessee challenged the assessment order before
the appellate authorities.
Issues Involved
- Whether the additions on account of unexplained deposits or credits
were justified.
- Whether the assessee had satisfactorily explained the nature and
source of the amounts.
- Whether the burden of proof placed on the assessee was duly
discharged.
Petitioner’s (Assessee’s) Arguments
- The assessee contended that the transactions were genuine and
supported by explanations regarding their source.
- It was argued that the Assessing Officer did not properly
appreciate the evidence furnished.
- The assessee sought deletion of the additions on the ground that
the amounts did not represent undisclosed income.
Respondent’s (Revenue’s) Arguments
- The Revenue maintained that the assessee failed to produce credible
and verifiable documentary evidence to substantiate the claimed sources.
- Mere explanations without supporting proof could not discharge the
statutory burden under law.
- Therefore, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified.
Court Order / Findings (ITAT)
- The primary onus lies on the assessee to establish the identity,
genuineness, and source of funds credited or deposited.
- In the absence of satisfactory evidence, the Assessing Officer is
justified in treating the amounts as unexplained income.
- Additions based on unexplained deposits or credits are sustainable
where the assessee fails to substantiate the explanation with reliable
material.
Important Clarification
Unexplained credits or deposits may be assessed as
income when the assessee fails to provide satisfactory evidence regarding their
source.
- Individuals undergoing scrutiny assessments
- Cases involving unexplained bank transactions
- Burden of proof in unexplained income matters
- Documentation requirements in tax proceedings
Link to download the order –https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1606481052-ITA%20249%20&%20261%20-%20Rajesh%20Bajaj.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and
knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information
from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or
advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability
arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the
assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment