ASHOK THAKUR,SHIVPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ASHOK NAGAR, GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 170/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra24 April 2026AY 2022-238 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had established running a coaching centre and hostel, and the cash deposits were related to fees received from students. Therefore, the addition related to advance fees and fees received from students was directed to be allowed. However, issues related to agricultural income and a deposit from Lala Ram required further verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared income from coaching classes and hostel services. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated a significant portion of cash deposits in the bank as unexplained income under Section 69A, despite the assessee providing explanations and supporting documents. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) upheld the AO's addition.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits in the bank account, explained as fees from coaching classes and hostel services, can be treated as unexplained income. Whether issues related to agricultural income and a specific deposit require further verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 57

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

For Respondent: DR (Physical hearing)
Hearing: 22.04.2026Pronounced: 24.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH (SMC), AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 170/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Ashok Thakur Vs. Income Tax Officer Fatehpur Road Shovpuri, Ashok Nagar. Shivpur (MP)-473551. PAN : ADMPT2877P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Adv., Manuj Sharma, Adv. Department by Sh. Harsh Siddharth Gautam, Sr. DR (Physical hearing) Date of hearing 22.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 24.04.2026 ORDER PER : S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 05.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2022- 23.

2.

Brief fact of the case are that the assessee has filed his return of income for the above assessment year, declaring the total income at Rs. 5,29,980/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CAAS on the

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

ground "large cash deposit in bank account and assessee has also purchased/sold one or more properties during the year. During the course of assessment proceeding, assessee was asked to furnish the source of cash deposited in the bank account along with details of the purchases and sale of immovable properties. In response to the notice issued, the assessee has filed a detailed reply, explaining the nature and source of the deposits in the bank a/c with supporting evidences. The AO has accepted all the deposit amount with the bank as explained, but has made the addition for Rs. 53,66,700/, treating the same as unexplained within the meaning of Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act. Further, the assessee during the course of assessment proceeding as well as proceeding before the NFAC has filed his explanation, explaining all the entries (deposits with bank), appearing in the bank account, out of which the AO has not accepted the amount of Rs. 53,66,700/-, deposited in the bank account, which represents the amount received by the assessee relates to the receipts from the coaching classes provided by the assessee, from where the total amount of Rs. 33,75,500/- was received. The assessee submitted before the authorities below that he is carrying the income from coaching classes from where the total receipts of Rs.33,75,500/- and after deducting the expenses, the net income at Rs. 5,40,000/- is shown in the return of 2 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

income for which the assessee has duly filed the P&L Account and acknowledgement slip for filing of return

3.

Further, the assessee has also submitted that Rs.9,75,000/- represents the security money received by the assessee from students which the assessee has deposited during the year and the same was adjusted in the next year, in supports of which, the assessee has filed various documents. The authorities below have not accepted the aforesaid submissions and made the addition, treating the deposit to the extent of Rs 53,66,700/-, against which the appeal was preferred before the NFAC who has sustained the addition as made by the Assessing Officer.

4.

Aggrieved the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds:-

“1. That, NFAC has erred on facts and in law while passing the order sustaining the addition AT Rs. 53,66,700/- as made by AO, order passed by NFAC dated 05.02.2026 is bad in law being passed not in accordance with provisions of sec 250(6) of Income Tax Act, same is liable to be set-a-side. 2. That, while sustaining the addition made, invoking the provisions of sec 69A of Income Tax Act, the NFAC has 2 comp completely ignored that provisions of sec 69A are not attracted in the case of assessee, no addition invoking of sec 69A could be made, addition made by AO, sustained by NFAC is liable to be deleted. 3. That, while sustaining the addition made by AO, the NFAC has not considered the facts that appellant has dufy filed detailed explanation, explaining the nature and source of deposits made with bank without pointing 3 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

out any discrepancy in the explanation, same cannot be rejected, no addition is liable to be made addition made by AO, sustained by NFAC is liable to be deleted. T 4. That, deposit with bank account (subject matter of addition) is fully explained, with reference to the explanation furnished by the appellant, no addition is liable to made, addition sustained by NFAC is liable to be deleted. 5. Order passed by NFAC dated 05.02.2026 is bad in law liable to be set-a- side.” 5. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee brought to our notice page 8 of the paper book which is chart of cash deposit made by the assessee to the extent of Rs. 90,85,000/- and the sources of cash was explained by the assessee for which the Assessing Officer has accepted cash withdrawn by the assessee from HDFC bank and bank of Baroda to the extent of Rs. 7,00,000/- and Rs. 30,14,700/- remaining amount of Rs. 6,50,000/-, Rs. 975,000/- and Rs. 33,75,000/- which are received from Shri Lala Ram, advance fees received from students and fees received by the assessee during the year. In this regard, he brought to our notice return of income filed by the assessee previous as well as subsequent assessment year, also for the impugned assessment year. He submitted that in all the above return of income, assessee has consistently declared coaching and hostel income. During the year under consideration, he submitted that assessee has declared Rs. 5,40,200/- and he specifically brought to our notice page 14 of the paper book which is return of income filed by the assessee for the year under 4 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

consideration. He submitted that assessee has received fees from students and advance fees in cash, the same was utilized to deposit during the year. Since, the assessee has consistently declared the income from coaching and hostel income and the gross fees received by the assessee as source of cash deposit in the bank which was denied by the lower authorities. He prayed that assessee has already brought on record sources of cash deposits, the same may be allowed.

6.

On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that assessee has declared the income earned from coaching and hostel income under the head income from other sources. If that being the case, corresponding expenditure cannot be allowed to the assessee u/s 57 of the Act. In this regard, he relied on the detailed findings of the lower authorities.

7.

Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that assessee has established that assessee is running the business of coaching centre and hostel for the students regularly over the years, the assessee has filed detailed bank statement, cash deposit to the extent of Rs. 67,35,000/- in bank of BOB which includes advance fees received by the assessee from students. On careful consideration, we noticed that assessee has already brought on record the computation of total income itself that assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 79,98,320/-

5 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

and at the same time, assessee has withdrawn cash to the extent of Rs. 45,52,700/-. The above facts on record clearly establish that assessee in fact running a hostel and coaching centre for the students. The assessee has not only deposited the cash as well as withdrawn cash to meet huge expenditure of the running it hostel. The assessee consistently declared income from coaching and hostel over the years this establishes the fact that assessee is running coaching centre and assessee has infact received fees from students. We observed that Ld. DR submitted that assessee has declared the income from other sources, therefore, the assessee is not eligible to claim the relevant expenditure u/s 57 of the Act. After careful consideration it is already established that assessee is running a coaching centre along with hostel services to the students and assessee has received fees for the same in cash, the same was deposited in the bank and also withdrawn the cash to meet the relevant expenditure. We noticed that to the extent of Rs. 7,00,000/- and Rs. 30, 14,700/- was accepted by the Assessing Officer on the basis of cash withdrawn by the assessee from the respective bank. However he denied the fees deposited by the assessee from the student as well as advance fees received by the assessee. Since the assessee has already established the fact that the assessee is running coaching and hostel, assessee also withdrawn huge cash to meet the above expenditure 6 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

accordingly, the assessee declared income from running hostel and coaching centre . There is direct source available to the assessee to make cash deposit from the students. Therefore we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the advance fees received from students to the extent of Rs. 9.75 lakh and fees received to the extent of Rs. 33.75 lakh.

8.

The next issue is cash deposited by the assessee out of agricultural income, similar to the running of hostel and coaching centre the assessee was consistently declaring agricultural income in the earlier assessment also. Before us, the assessee receipt of Mandi Samit for sale of agricultural products which is kept at page 38 to 43 of the paper book. Similarly the assessee also deposited Rs. 6,50,000/- received from Lala Ram. Before us, assessee has not submitted any documents with regard amount received from Lala Ram however, he has submitted that assessee has filed confirmation. In this regard, however nothing was submitted before us. Since the issue under consideration relating to agricultural income and amount received from Lala Ram, these two issues requires verification, therefore we are inclined to remit these two issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify on the basis of documents submitted by the assessee. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the same as per law and also directed to give proper opportunity

7 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2026

of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the issue raised by the assessee relating to income from running of coaching centre and hostel are allowed and the issue of agricultural income and amount received from Lala Ram are remitted back to the Assessing Officer for statistical purposes.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24 .04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.04.2026 *Santosh, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

8 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →