USHA SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 44(1), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case effectively before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the assessment was restored to the AO for fresh assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee's bank account had cash deposits, leading to a re-opening of the assessment. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 22,60,000/- as the assessee did not appear before him. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for lack of evidence regarding the source of deposits.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for unexplained cash deposits is justified without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to present evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
ORDER
PER KUL BHARAT, JM :
The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi dated 09.09.2019. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. “That the Assessing Officer has wrongly and illegally make the addition of Rs.22,60,000/- in the income of the assessee by applying provisions of Section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961. The amount was deposited in cash in the bank Account which does not call for addition u/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. That the learned CIT appeal has wrongly and illegally confirmed the addition made by the AO by applying provsiions of section 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. That the assessee had the explanation of detail of cash deposited made from own funds, sale of the property and the amount received from mother.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances the addition of Rs.22,60,000/- in the income of the assessee may kindly be deleted.”
Year : 2010-11] 2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, a letter is received by the Registry on behalf of the Ld. Authorized representative of the assessee stating that written submission and Paper Book have already been submitted vide speed post. It was prayed that since the assessment was ex-parte so that assessment may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer (“AO”).
The only effective ground in this appeal is regarding the addition of Rs.22,60,000/- in the income of the assessee.
FACTS OF THE CASE 4. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that case of the assessee was re-opened on the basis that there were cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee. Before the AO, no one attended the proceedings. Therefore, the AO made addition of Rs.22,60,000/-.
Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A) who after considering the submissions, dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the basis that no evidence regarding the title, address of property or the date of transaction or the Sale Deed of the property were furnished by the assessee. Hence, in the absence of supporting evidence, appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. Sr. DR opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that in the absence of supporting evidence
Year : 2010-11] regarding source of cash deposits, the AO was justified to treat the deposits as unexplained income.
I have heard Ld.Sr.DR and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. It is contended that during the appellate proceedings, no attempt was made to substantiate the source of cash deposits. The assessee has filed a Paper Book enclosing sale agreements executed by the assessee. It is seen that the agreement is regarding sale of property in favour of Shri Kapil Gupta, son of Shri Inderjit Gupta. Looking to the sale agreement and the submissions of the assessee, I am of the considered view that the assessee should be given a chance to represent his case effectively before the AO. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the assessment is restored to the file of AO for making assessment afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee. Thus, Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
