SUKHVIR SINGH,MOHALI, PUNJAB vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHANDIGARH

ITA 773/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 September 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide adequate evidence to support his claims before the lower authorities. However, it also found that Section 115BBE might not be applicable for the assessment year. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an agriculturist, deposited Rs. 19,84,727/- in his bank account during the demonetization period and other times. He failed to provide satisfactory documentary evidence to explain the source of these deposits, claiming they were from agricultural receipts and his paternal uncle.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits in the bank account were adequately explained by the assessee, and whether Section 115BBE was applicable to the assessment year in question.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 144,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “बी” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी िवजय वमा" , लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 773 /Chd/ 2026 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sukhvir Singh बनाम The ITO S/o Shri Ajit Singh, Village Sante Majra, Ward 6(4) Tehsil Kharar, Mohali, Punjab-140301 Chandigarh "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: HANPS9931Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri B.M. Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocate राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03/09/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 17/09/2026

आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dt. 09/01/2026 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds:

1.

That the order of Ld. CIT(A) is against the law and facts of the case.

2.

That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 19,84,730/- in the hands of appellant

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →