NEELAM GARG,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), FBD, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4411/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 August 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the impugned cash deposits in fact represent withdrawals from a loan account, which had not been rebutted by the Revenue. Therefore, these deposits could not be treated as unexplained.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order treating cash deposits made during demonetization, amounting to Rs. 14,46,500/-, as unexplained. The assessee provided a bank statement showing cash withdrawals of Rs. 14,50,000/- from a loan account.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits during demonetization, supported by evidence of prior loan account withdrawals, can be considered unexplained income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 25.08.2025Pronounced: 25.08.2025

Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Neelam Garg, Vs Income Tax Officer, 332, Ground Floor, Sector-16, Ward-2(1), Faridabad, Haryana-121001 Faridabad, Haryana-122001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAVPG7988G Assessee by: Sh. Saksham Garg, CA & Sh. Shivam Garg, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 25.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.08.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070604288(1) dated 25.11.2024, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have treated the assessee’s cash deposits during demonetization amounting to Rs.14,46,500/- as unexplained, in the assessment order dated 11.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

Neelam Garg 4. That being the case, the assessee has filed her bank account statement indicating cash withdrawals in a loan account maintained with M/s ICICI Bank on 25.07.2015 amounting to Rs.14,50,000/- which has gone un-rebutted from the Revenue side. It is thus clear that the necessary inference which would arise in the given facts is that the assessee’s impugned cash deposits infact represent the cash withdrawals from loan account which could not be treated as unexplained. The impugned addition stands deleted in very terms.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →