The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)2, Ahmedabad [CIT(A) in short] vide appeal no.CIT(A)-2/337/15-16 dated 22/06/2016 arising in the assessment order passed under s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(here-in-after referred to as " the") dated 22/01/2015 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10.

2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. On facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A)-II, Vadodara erred in confirming an addition of Rs.383000/- on account of difference in ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 2 - undisclosed income. It is prayed to consider that cash receipts for Rs.120000/- as sale consideration of shop and dead stock and Rs.263000/- as sale proceeds and assess the same @5% u/s.44AF, the addition on account of undisclosed income be deleted from the computation of total income.

2. The appellant craves leave to add/amend/alter or delete any of the ground of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal. The issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,83,300/- made by the AO on account of undisclosed income.

2. The facts of the case are that the assessee an Individual and engaged in the business of retail trading of auto rickshaw parts under the name of M/s New Raaz Automobiles. The assessee in the year under consideration was subjected to assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the as the assessee did not file the return as per the provision of section 139 of the. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee did not disclose his one of the bank account maintained with Central Bank of India in his regular books of account. Therefore the AO directed the assessee to furnish the bank statement for the F.Y. 2008-09 along with the explanation and supporting evidence regarding the deposits and withdrawals. In response, the assessee filed a copy of the bank statement and explained that the deposits appearing in the bank statement was from the trading receipt. ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 3 - However, the AO disagreed with the explanation of the assessee as nothing was produced in support of the claim. Therefore the AO disregarded the assessees contention that Rs. 1,46,000/- was deposited out of the cash sale receipt and Rs. 1,05,647/- was deposited through cheques on various dates out of the trading sale. The AO also rejected the assessees request to consider the income as per section 44AF of the. The assessee also did not submit any supporting evidence in respect of Rs. 2,37,000/- which was deposited in the bank account of his wife. The AO on perusal of the bank statement of wife of the assessee also observed that there was credited a sum of Rs. 133/- as interest. Thus in view of the same, the AO added the sum of Rs. 4,88,780/- to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). The assessee before the Ld. CIT (A) submitted that the amount appearing in the credit side of the bank account for Rs. 97,758/- was refunded against share application money which was earlier invested in the IPO of the company. The assessee further submitted that the cash of Rs. 1,46,000/- and Rs. 2,37,000/- deposited in own account and his wife account was basically the sale proceeds of the shop of Rs. 90,000/-, sale proceeds of the scrap of Rs. 30,000/- and balance Rs. 2,63,500/- was received against the sale of goods and cash received from debtors. ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 4 - However, the Ld. CIT (A) observed that the assessee deposited cash Rs. 1,46,000/- in the central bank account between 01-05-2008 to 02-06- 2008 while the cheque of Rs. 97,758/- was credited on 09-09-2008. Similarly, the cash of Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in his wife account between 14-05-2008 to 09-06-2008 and Rs. 37,500/- on 25-06-2008. Thus the total cash deposited in both the account was Rs. 3,83,500/- only. As such the assessees contention that the cash was deposited from sale proceeds of the shop was not possible as the sale of the shop was effected on 27-08-2008. Similarly, the cash deposited against the sale of scrap was also not possible as the shop sold by the assessee along with scrap which was lying in the shop. Further, the assessee did not provide/submit any evidence in respect of the sale of scrap. The Ld. CIT (A) further observed that the assessee after depositing the cash utilized the same for purchase of shares through Angel Broking and Ashoka Stock Broking Ltd. Thus, the Ld. CIT (A) was of the view that the cash generated through the sale of shop and scrap was not deposited in the account. As such the assessee was having the cash to the extent of Rs. 3,83,500/- at the time of depositing the same for which the assessee has no explanation. Therefore the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the addition of Rs. 3,83,500/- made by the AO u/s 69A of the. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee is in appeal before us. ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 5 -

4. The Ld. AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 54 and submitted as under:

1. The A.O. has made addition of Rs.4,88,647/- comprising total of deposit side of Bank A/c. of F.Y. 2008-09 Rs.2,51,647/-. (Page No.7 of Paper Book, Rs.2,37,000/- in the Bank A/c. of his wife refer to page Nod.11 of Paper Book. Rs.133/- bank interest in the bank a/c. of wife.

2. There is cash withdrawal of Rs.50,000/- on 22/01/2008 relevant to A.Y.2008-09 in the bank account of the assessee (Refer to page No.11 of paper book) of Mumtazbanu, wife of assessee.

3. Amount of Rs.97,758/- credited in the Bank account of the assessee with PAN of payee on 08/09/2008 being return of share application money made on 31/01/2008 duly debited in the bank account of the assessee vide Cheque No.219744 (refer to page No.9 of paper book) whereby amount deposited of Rs.94,500/- is explained.

4. Cash amount of Rs.59,000/- withdrawn by the assessee on 28/03/2008 available to explain cash deposit in F.Y. 2008-09.

5. Wife of the assessee is educated upto S.S.C. as per School Leaving Certificate at Page No.10 of the Paper book.

5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR vehemently supported the authorities below.

6. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 6 - the cash deposited by the assessee in his saving bank account as well as in the saving bank account of his wife. The breakup of the cash deposits stands as under: i. deposit of cash in the bank account of the assessee Rs. 1,46,000.00 ii. deposit of cash in the bank account of the assessees wife Rs. 2,37,500.00 Regarding the deposit of cash in the bank account of the assessee for 1,46,000.00 we note that the assessee has withdrawn cash of 59,000.00 from his saving bank account dated 28-3-2008 as evident from the bank statement placed on page 9 of the paper book. There was no information available whether the assessee utilized such cash withdrawal for some other purposes. Therefore we can safely assume that such amount of cash of 59,000 was available with the assessee which has been utilized in the deposit of cash in his bank account as discussed above. Thus in our considered view, the assessee is entitled to relief to the extent of 59,000 only. Regarding the deposit of cash in the bank account of the assessees wife, we note that the same cannot be added to the total income of the assessee until and unless the case of the assessee falls under the chapter V of the, i.e., clubbing of income. As such, we find that the provisions of chapter V were not invoked. Therefore we delete the addition made by ITA No.2375/Ahd/2016 Mohamedrafiq Malangbhai Dudhwala vs. ITO Asst.Year 2009-10 - 7 - the AO which was subsequently confirmed by the learned CIT-A. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.

7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 31/05/2019 Sd/- Sd/- (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 31/05/2019 .., .(../T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS  
 /Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1.  / The Appellant

2.  / The Respondent.

3. * , / Concerned CIT

4. , () / The CIT(A)-2, Vadodara 5. / ((*,  *, / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. 5 / Guard file. / BY ORDER, / ( //True Copy// / (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) $ %, / ITAT, Ahmedabad

1. Date of dictation 28.5.19 (word processed by Honble AM in his computer by dragon)

2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 29.5.19

3. Other Member

4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S

5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement

6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S.31.5.19

7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk31.5.19

8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk...

9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order..

10. Date of Despatch of the Order