SURENDRA MADANLAL MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 41(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 130/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 September 2026AY 2017-186 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 17,06,500/- in cash into bank accounts during the demonetization period. He claimed this was accumulated savings from commission income kept at home for emergencies, and that it was reflected as cash balance in the previous year's balance sheet.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation for holding such a large amount of cash at home to be not tenable, especially given his limited income. The filing of the previous year's return after the demonetization period was considered an afterthought to justify the deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits made during demonetization were unexplained money under Section 69A, and if the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to explain the source and nature of the cash.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar ( SR. DR. )
Pronounced: 07.09.2026

PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. NFAC, Delhi, dated 26-Oct-2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

Ground 1-To Delete the addition made of Rs. 17,06,500/- as Unexplained Money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The Ld. Assessing officer (A.O.) erred in making addition of Unexplained Money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 Rs.17,06,500/-. The cash deposited in the sa

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 15,187 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →