HEMANT KESHAVRAO BARSAGADE,GADCHIROOLI vs. ITO WARD-1, CHANDRAPUR

ITA 58/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 September 2026AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficient cash in hand from withdrawals from their disclosed bank accounts prior to the investment date, thus explaining the source of the investment. Consequently, the addition for unexplained investment was deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee made an investment of Rs. 10,00,000/- with M/s. Wasankar Wealth Management Ltd. The Assessing Officer treated this as unexplained investment as the assessee claimed it was from a cash loan. The assessee later claimed the cash was withdrawn from their bank accounts.

What were the issues?

Whether the investment of Rs. 10,00,000/- was sufficiently explained by cash withdrawals from the assessee's bank accounts. Whether the penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) is sustainable if the primary addition is deleted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 115BBE,Section 271(1)(c),Section 147,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR SMC BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Lohiya, CA
For Respondent: Shri Shiv Shankar Yadav, Sr.DR
Hearing: 29/07/2026Pronounced: 10/09/2026

These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ NFAC, Delhi (for short, “CIT(A)”) both dated 28.03.2024 passed u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which are arising out of rectification order dated 24.02.2023 passed u/sec. 154 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and penalty order dated 19.09.2022 passed u/sec. 271(1)(c) of the Act by the ITO, Ward-1, Chandrapur for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14 respectively.

2.

Registry has informed that there is a delay of 606 days in ITA No. 58/NAG/2026 and 602 days in ITA No. 99/NAG/2026 in filing the present appeals. Applications for condonation of delay along with affidavits are placed on re

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 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →