SATBIR SINGH KHATRA,PATIALA vs. ITO WARD-4, PATIALA, AAYKAR BHAWAN

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.135/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Satbir Singh Khatra ITO Ward – 4 बनाम/ Vs. H.No. B-52, Sarabha Nagar Patiala Bhadson Road, Punjab – 147001 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BNDPK-3404-M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Ashok Goel (CA) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR (Virtual) सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-05-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 02-06-2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, [CIT(A)] dated 07-11-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 25-12-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposit for Rs.78.30 Lacs. Having heard rival

submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. 2. During assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.75 Lacs & Rs.4.90 Lacs in his Indusind Bank Account and HDFC Bank Account respectively. The assessee stated that the same were sourced out of withdrawals during FYs 2014-15 & 2015-16. The assessee also stated to have received gift from his maternal uncle for Rs.5 Lacs on 30-04-2016. However, the said accumulation of cash over two years as claimed by the assessee stood rejected by Ld. AO. It was noted by Ld. AO that the withdrawals were made on 29 different occasions and therefore, the assessee’s submissions were held to be not tenable. The assessee had made deposits of Rs.66 Lacs between 01-04-2016 to 06-06-2016. After granting benefit of Rs.5 Lacs, the remaining amount of Rs.61 Lacs was added as unexplained income of the assessee. The assessee had deposited cash of Rs.9.20 Lacs between 09-06-2016 to 26-12-2016 which stood accepted to the extent of Rs.1 Lacs and the remaining deposits of Rs.9.10 Lacs were further added to the income of the assessee. The assessee reflected higher agricultural income to the extent of 29% in this year in comparison to earlier year which was held to be highly improbable. Assuming hike of 10%, the remaining amount of Rs.3.78 Lacs was added as ‘income from other sources’. The assessee largely remained non-compliant during first appeal and preferred written submissions only. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected cash flow statement of the assessee on the ground that the assessee did not

make any attempt to co-relate the deposits with the agricultural income or with income from other sources. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee owned substantial land holding of 172 Kanal 10 Marla which is duly supported by the certificate from Tehsil office and copies of Jamabandi for ownership of agricultural land. It has further been contended that the assessee has bank limit of Rs.141.50 Lacs from Indusind Bank to meet short-term working capital requirement for agricultural and allied activities which is one of the sources of impugned deposits. Further, the assessee’s wife also owns substantial land of 120 Kanal and 19 Marla from which agriculturalincome has been derived by the assessee on regular basis. All these documents have been filed for the first time before us. The Ld. AR also placed on record cash flow statement in support of cash deposits in the bank. We are of the considered opinion that all these documents would have material bearing on the impugned claim of the assessee and the submissions have been rejected by lower authorities for want of supporting documentary evidences form the assessee. On these facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. AO to frame de novo assessment in the light of these evidences with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. No other ground has been urged before us.

-Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 02-06-2026 AS आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH