RAHUL KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 44(2) DELHI, NEW DELHI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A), Aurangabad’s DIN & order No.
ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073852856(1) dated 28.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short
“the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
Learned counsel vehemently submits at the outset that both the lower authorities herein have erred in law and on facts in making section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE addition of Rs.2,22,000/- representing cash deposits during demonetization, in the assessment order dated 24.12.2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. Rahul Kumar 2 4. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that the assessee all along is a salaried employ working with M/s Mankind Pharma Ltd.; and, therefore, possibility of his families as well as his personal cash savings could not be altogether denied in such an instance. I therefore, see no merit in the impugned addition of Rs.2,22,000/- made by both the authorities which is hereby deleted in very terms.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 10/06/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)
Judicial Member
Dated: 10/06/2025
*Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*