What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the explanation and the meagre amount of the deposit justified. Therefore, the addition made by the lower authorities was ordered to be deleted.

The assessee's bank account had a deposit of Rs. 29,300/- which the lower authorities added to his income as the source was unexplained. The assessee claimed the amount was from past savings, his father, and a loan refund.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of unexplained bank deposits is justified when the assessee provides a plausible explanation for a meagre amount.

Bhoora Ram Sau, Barmer vs ITO | ITAT Jaipur 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Hearing: 18.03.2026Pronounced: 21.04.2026

P a g e | 1 ITA No.1626/JPR/2025 Bhoora Ram Sau IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1626/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2018-19) Bhoora Ram Sau Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/o CLC, Laxmi Niwas, Sikar Piprali Road Sikar 332001 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:BQQPS6045J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Bhoora Ram Sau, Assessee Respondent by : Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT Date of Hearing 18.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 21.04.2026 O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order ofthe National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 22.09.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

The assessee in the appeal is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.29,300/- to the income of the assessee on account of deposit in the bank account, the source of which, assessee could not explain. The assessee, Sh. Bhoora Ram Sau, has come personally to present and has relied upon his bank statement to

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1626/JPR/2025 Bhoora Ram Sau submit that the aforesaid small amount was deposited out of his savings from past withdrawals and also from some minor cash received from his father and the refund of an earlier loan given to his friend.

Considering the bank statement and the explanation given by the assessee and the meagre amount of deposit of Rs.29,300/-, I do not find justification on the part of lower authorities in making the impugned addition and the same is ordered to be deleted.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.

Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 21.04.2026.

Sd/- (Sanjay Garg) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 21.04.2026. Mittali, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur

BHOORA RAM SAU,BARMER vs. ITO, SIKAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments