TAREEKAT,MEERUT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(4), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2222/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2026AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred in treating the withdrawals as unexplained expenditure. The assessee's foreign exchange agent license supported the claim that the withdrawals were part of his agency business and not unexplained income.

What were the facts?

The assessee's bank account withdrawals were treated as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C by the lower authorities. The assessee claimed to be a transfer agent for foreign exchange companies, earning commission, and that the withdrawals were pass-through payments.

What were the issues?

Whether cash withdrawals from the assessee's bank account, where the assessee acted as a transfer agent, can be treated as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C. Whether such withdrawals constitute turnover under Section 44AD in the absence of independent business activity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 16.07.2026Pronounced: 16.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2222/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Tareekat, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 29 Rasoolpur Ikla, Ward-1(2)(4), Kila Road, Mawana, Meerut Meerut 250406 PAN: AJFPT5749M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Saurabh Panwar, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 16.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 16.07.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084214833(1), dated 30.12.2025, involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee raises the following sole substantive ground: “On the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the learned AO by treating cash withdrawn from the appellant's own bank account as unexplained expenditure under section 69C. The appellant acted only as a transfer agent for Weizmann Forex Ltd. (now EbixCash World Money India Ltd.) and

ITA No.2222/Del/2026

Instant Global Money Transfer Pvt. Ltd., earning commission of 231,521/- as per Form 26AS. The withdrawals were pass-through payments to beneficiaries and not turnover. In the absence of any independent business activity, the sum of ₹1,12,02,258/- cannot be treated as turnover under section 44AD.” 3. Suffice to say, it has come on record that both the learned lower authorities have assessed the assessee for his withdrawals than deposits made in the concerned bank account on the ground that he had all along failed to submit a reasonable explanation thereon during assessment as well as in the lower appellate proceedings. Learned counsel at this stage invites the tribunal’s attention to page 44 in the paper-book wherein he has placed his foreign exchange agent licence granted way back on 20.10.2009 by the “Western Union Money Transfer” latter stated to be re- designated as “M/s. Weizmann Forex Ltd.” (now “EbixCash World Money India Ltd.”). I, therefore, see no merit in both the learned lower authorities’ action assessing the assessee’s withdrawals thereby making section 69C addition, which stands deleted in very terms. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th July, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER 2 | P a g e

ITA No.2222/Del/2026

Dated: 31st July, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →