MS. KIRAN OMPRAKASH GOENKA ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1282/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 June 2026AY 2017-187 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 found that the assessee provided sufficient documentary evidence, including bank statements and cash flow statements, to establish the source of the cash deposits. The revenue failed to produce any material to disprove the availability of cash.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 14,49,000/- in cash during the demonetization period, which the Assessing Officer treated as unexplained income. The assessee, a senior citizen with a medical condition, claimed the deposits were from accumulated cash withdrawals over preceding years.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits made during the demonetization period were adequately explained by the assessee, and if not, whether they could be added as unexplained income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “J(SMC

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Lohia (Adv.)
For Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai (Sr.DR)
Hearing: 10/06/2026Pronounced: 15/06/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J(SMC)”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 (Assessment year: 2017-18)

Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka vs ACIT, C.C.-2(4), Mumbai 101 Somerest, Warden Road, 802, 8th floor, Pratishtha Bhavan, Opp. Sophia College Lane, Old CGO Annex, Maharshi Karve Mumbai-400026 Road, Mumbai-400020 PAN: ABIPG3140L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri M.P. Lohia (Adv.) Revenue by : Shri Aditya Rai (Sr.DR) Date of hearing : 10/06/2026 Date of pronouncement : 15/06/2026 O R D E R Per:Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-48, Mumbai [for brevity the “Ld. CIT(A)”], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18, date of order 11.12.2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax–C.C.

2 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka 2(4), Mumbai (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 143(3) of the Act date of order 04.12.2019.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is in individual (senior citizen) filed the return by declaring total loss amount of Rs.10,17,602/-. The return was processed u/sec. 143(1) and thereafter the case was selected under CASS as limited scrutiny. The assessment was completed by determining total income of Rs.14,49,000/-. The Ld. AO found that the assessee had deposited cash amount of Rs.14,49,000/- during the demonetization period. The assessee was unable to explain the source of cash deposit before the Ld. AO. accordingly, the Ld. AO added back with the total income of the assessee u/sec. 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act amount to Rs.14,49,000/-. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). But the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the impugned assessment order. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us.

3.

The Ld. AR argued and filed a paper book comprising pages 1 to 167 which has been placed on record. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee regularly filed her return. In AY 2013-14 the assessee filed the return on 17/12/2013 in Form No. ITR-4 where the assessee declared cash balance in Part A–BS in Row No.3(a)(iii)(A) the cash in hand amount of Rs.6,82,496/-. Thereafter, the assessee regularly filed the return from A.Y. 2014-15 in Form No. ITR-2. There was no designated column for declaring the cash balance of the assessee. But during the assessment proceeding the assessee submitted the computation, year wise cash flow statements, bank statements, year wise balance sheets and capital accounts

3 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka and also the balance sheet and capital account of the assessee’s husband, Sri Om Prakash Goenka. The relevant documents are duly annexed in APB page-57 to 155. 4. During the course of proceedings before the revenue authorities, the Ld. AR explained that the cash deposits made during the impugned assessment year were sourced from cash withdrawals accumulated over the preceding years. In support of this contention, the Ld. AR invited our attention to paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned assessment order, wherein the Assessing Officer had recorded the assessee’s detailed submissions along with the year-wise cash-flow statement commencing from Financial Year 2013-14. The relevant extract of the assessee’s submissions, as reproduced in the assessment order, is set out below: “5. In response to the notice, assessee filed required the details online and stated that "Bank deposits during the period 08.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 was out of my withdrawals from bank". And assessee has submitted following chart which shows details of cash deposit and withdrawals from 1.4.2013 to 31.03.2017: Year Op Balance Withdrawal Deposited to Expenses Closing from bank bank incurred balance FY 2013-14 6,82,497 6,10,000 47,500 6,05,675 6,39,322 FY 2014-15 6,39,322 6,25,000 - 53,755 12,10,567 FY 2015-16 12,10,567 5,07,000 1000 2,08,075 15,08,492 FY 2016-17 15,08,492 - 14,52,800 644 55,048

 However assessee did not submit any bank statements or withdraw challans in support of the above claim.  It can also be seen that the expenses shown by the assessee has decreased drastically after FY 2013-14. In FY 2016-17 which is year of high cash deposit, assessee is only showing cash expenses of Rs.644. This is decrease of 1000 times compared to FY 2013-

4 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka 14. In reality cash expenses should have increased taken into account yearly inflation rate.  Further total cash deposit made by the assessee in FY 2015-16 which is immediate preceding year is Rs. 1,000 only. There has been increase in cash deposit by 1452 times in FY 2016-17. The explanation given by the assessee is without any documentary proof and is beyond  the human probability. The explanation of decrease in cash expenses given by the assessee is only an afterthought. Assessee has shown very less cash expenses just to accommodate the cash deposit entries. Although it does not stand any rationale. 6. The only issue for the year under consideration is Cash Deposited During Demonetization Period and It is seen from the AIR details that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.9,00,000/- in Bharat Cooperative Bank, Mumbai, Fort Branch and Rs.5,49,000/-in IDBI Bank Limited, Warden Road Branch during the demonetization period i.e. from 09.11.2019 to 30.12.2016. However, the assessee did not provide the details of source of cash nor furnished any details pertaining to cash deposited in the bank.”

5.

The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen and has been suffering from Acoustic Neuroma, a serious medical condition involving a brain tumor. In support of this contention, the relevant medical records were placed on record at pages 4 to 13 of the APB. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer had rejected the assessee’s explanation primarily on the ground that the bank statements and cash withdrawal challans supporting the claim were not furnished during the assessment proceedings. It was contended that, owing to her severe medical condition, the assessee was not in a position to actively attend to her affairs and did not have adequate staff to compile and furnish the requisite details before the Ld. AO. The Ld. AR further submitted that, with the assistance of professionals, the assessee was subsequently able to compile the relevant records and furnish complete details in support of her claim. In this regard, the assessee filed a date-wise statement reflecting cash withdrawals and

5 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka deposits in the bank accounts for the period from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2017. The assessee also produced the relevant bank statements, wherein the withdrawals and subsequent deposits were duly highlighted and cross-referenced. The Ld. AR further pointed out that, as recorded by the Ld. AO, the assessee had cash-in- hand of Rs.15,08,492/- as at the end of Financial Year 2014-15, out of which a sum of Rs.14,49,000/- was deposited during the post-demonetisation period between 08.11.2016 and 31.12.2016. It was, therefore, submitted that the source of the cash deposits stood duly explained and the addition deserved to be deleted.

6.

Per contra, the Ld. DR contended that the aforesaid documents were not furnished before the revenue authorities during the assessment proceedings. The Ld. DR further submitted that the cash-flow statements relied upon by the assessee merely reflected cash withdrawals from various bank accounts over different years and failed to account for the personal and household expenses incurred during the intervening period. According to the Ld. DR, the availability of cash could not be presumed merely on the basis of withdrawals without demonstrating that such cash remained unutilised. It was, therefore, argued that the Ld. AO was justified in treating the cash deposits as unexplained, and the addition made by him deserved to be sustained. Accordingly, the Ld. DR relied upon and supported the orders of the revenue authorities.

6 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka 7. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee is a senior citizen and was suffering from a serious medical condition, namely a brain tumor. During the year under consideration, the assessee deposited cash aggregating to Rs.14,49,000/- in two bank accounts, comprising Rs.5,49,000/- in her IDBI Bank account and Rs.9,00,000/- in her Bharat Co-operative Bank account. The Ld. AO treated the cash deposits made on 16.11.2016, 18.11.2016 and 09.12.2016 as income from unexplained sources. We find that, both during the appellate proceedings and before us, the assessee furnished the relevant bank statements pertaining to herself as well as her husband. The material on record demonstrates that the assessee’s husband possessed substantial cash balances amounting to Rs.44,67,471/- as on 31.03.2015 and Rs.67,02,575/- as on 31.03.2016. Thus, the family had sufficient liquidity available for meeting its day-to-day requirements and maintaining household expenses. We further note that the assessee furnished a year-wise cash-flow statement, the details of which have also been recorded in the assessment order. The records reveal that the assessee had a cash balance of Rs.6,82,496/- in Assessment Year 2013-14, which stood duly reflected in the return of income filed for that year. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee has been able to establish the source of the cash deposits made in the bank accounts during the relevant period. The explanation furnished is supported by documentary evidence and cannot be rejected merely on the basis of conjectures or presumptions. In the absence of any material brought on record by the revenue to disprove the availability of cash, the addition cannot be sustained. We, therefore, direct the deletion of the addition made by the Ld. AO.

7 ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 Ms. Kiran Omprakash Goenka 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.1282/Mum/2026 is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 15th day of June 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 15/06/2026 SAUMYASr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु� CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →