Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 arose from proceedings under Section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The lower authorities assessed cash deposits of Rs. 12,50,000/- as unexplained. The assessee claimed they were added as an account holder in a succeeding financial year.
Held
The Tribunal found prima facie merit in the assessee's case, noting that the assessee was added as an account holder in a succeeding financial year and thus could not have been assessed for deposits in the relevant year. The case was accepted in principle, allowing the Assessing Officer to verify the bank certificate.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee could be assessed for cash deposits when they were added as an account holder in a succeeding financial year, and the bank certificate presented as additional evidence.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year: 2011-12 Sh. Ashish Sidhu, Vs Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 101, Oxford Block, Ward- Ward-1(1), 1(1), Grand Ford Society Sigma- Ghaziabad, IV, Greater Noida (GB Nagar), Uttar Pradesh-201001 Uttar Pradesh-201310 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BJEPS4758P Assessee by: Sh. Brij Bhushan, ITP Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 21.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052753036(1) dated 11.05.2023, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have assessed the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.12,50,000/- as unexplained in his hands, in assessment order dated 30.12.2018 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.
Ashish Sidhu 4. Faced with this situation, learned counsel has invited the tribunal’s attention to page 11 in the paper book wherein the concerned bank i.e. M/s Axis Bank has clarified that this assessee/appellant was added as an account holder only on 29.08.2011 as against the assessment year herein i.e. A.Y. 2011-12 involving F.Y. 2010-11. That being the case, learned departmental representative vehemently argues that the above correspondence coming from the bank dated 05.04.2025 is in the nature of the assessee’s additional evidence which has nowhere been verified by the lower authorities.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s foregoing vehement submissions. I prima facie find merit in the assessee’s case as he has only been added as an account holder in the succeeding financial year; and, therefore, he could not have been assessed for any deposits made in the relevant financial year involving assessment year 2011-12. The fact however remains that the above certificate is in the nature of the assessee’s additional evidence only. I therefore accept the assessee’s case in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify this limited issue of the above bank certificate, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and