SUJIN KUMAR ANAGANI,USA vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 271/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 August 2026AY 2020-2110 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had provided sufficient documentary evidence, including RTO records and buyer confirmation, to substantiate that the cash deposit represented consideration for the sale of a personal asset.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident, explained a cash deposit of Rs. 2,72,500 as advance received from the sale of a personal car. The Assessing Officer invoked Section 69A, but the DRP restricted the addition to the cash component.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposit of Rs. 2,72,500 could be treated as unexplained money under Section 69A when it was explained as sale consideration of a personal asset with supporting evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144C,Section 271AAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Pronounced: 13.08.2026

PER SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT :

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. ACIT, International Taxation vide DIN:ITBA/AST/S/147/2025- 26/1085027148(1) dated 21.01.2026 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the 1 Sujin Kumar Anagani

Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) in pursuant to the directions

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 →