TEMPA TSERING,NEW MARKET TAWANG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NORTH LAKHIMPUR, BORA COMPLEX NORTH LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM

ITA 321/GTY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati21 September 2026AY 2020-218 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence to substantiate the source of cash deposits. Therefore, the issue was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing the assessee an opportunity to present cogent documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited a large sum of cash in his bank account and claimed exemption under Section 10(26) of the IT Act, stating he was operating a petrol pump under a power of attorney. The Assessing Officer treated the bank deposits as unexplained money, and the CIT(A) confirmed this.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits in the bank account are unexplained money, and if the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 10(26) based on his role as a power of attorney holder for a business.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 10(26),Section 147,Section 148,Section 57

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, GAUHATI

Before: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Yogesh Kumar US

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC Delhi in (hereinafter referred to as a Ld. CIT(A) dated 23.03.2026 DIN &f Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1087762689(1) u/s 250 of the Act on the following grounds of appeal:- 1 For that the Ld A.O erred in treating total bank deposits of Rs 6,28,22,180.00 as unexplained money u/s 69A and Ld CIT (App

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 →