ANIL KUMAR YADAV,GURGAON vs. ITO,WARD-1(2), GURGAON

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

A perusal of the instant case file reveals that the learned assessing authority had set into motion section 148/147 proceedings against the assessee after recording it’s reasons to believe that the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.11,26,930/- as well as salary income of Rs.1,88,349/-; had escaped assessment. It’s re-assessment framed on 17.12.2018 ended up making both these additions in the assessee’s hands which Anil Kumar Yadav 2 stand partly confirmed qua the former and enhancement of the latter salary amount, in the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion.

That being the case, it is noticed that not only the assessee had cash withdrawals of Rs.10,00,000/- from his father’s account but also from his own bank account of Rs.7,88,100/- which could duly be held source of the cash addition of Rs.11,36,900/- in entirety. This former addition is deleted.

So far as his salary income addition is concerned, it is noticed that he had infact received an amount of Rs.1,88,349/- only going by corresponding Form 26AS entries. That being the case, no merit is found in the learned CIT(A)’s enhancement action which is hereby reversed and the original addition of Rs.1,88,349/- stands confirmed.

No other ground or argument has been pressed before us.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 25/06/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)