ATUL AGGARWAL AND AMIT AGGARWAL,MAIN BAZAR SARAHAN vs. ITO NAHAN, NAHAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 686/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 May 2026AY 2017-20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the bank account in question prima-facie belonged to Shri Atul Aggarwal, and its contents were already accounted for in his return. The matter was restored to the AO for a fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee-firm did not file its return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions based on cash deposits during demonetization and other bank credits, framing the assessment on a best judgment basis. The assessee claimed the bank account used for deposits belonged to an individual, Atul Aggarwal, whose assessment was already completed.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits and other credits in a bank account linked to the firm's PAN, but claimed to belong to an individual, were correctly treated as unexplained income of the firm.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.686/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Atul Aggarwal & Amit Aggarwal ITO बनाम/ Vs. Main Bazar, Sarahan Nahan (HP) - 173001 Srimour (HP) - 173024 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABCFA-3050-D (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Y.R.Saini (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 14-05-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 18-05-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee-firm for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 12-03-2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s 144 of the Act on 31-12-2019. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 2. The assessee being resident firm did not file its return of income. Pursuant to receipt of information that the assessee deposited cash of

Rs.45.80 Lacs in State Bank of India bearing Account No.30360023604 during demonetization period from 09-11-2016 to 31-12-2016, a notice was issued to the assessee on 29-11-2017 to file its return of income. The assessee remained non-responsive. It was noted that the account was held in the name of Atul Aggarwal but the same was connected with the PAN of the assessee-firm. Considering the same, the deposit of Rs.45.80 Lacs was held to be unexplained money u/s 69A. Apart from above cash deposits during demonetization period, there were other credits for Rs.595.82 Lacs in Bank Account No.30360023604 as well as in other Bank Account No. 34877970285 on which Ld. AO applied presumptive rate of 8% u/s 44AD and made another addition of business income for Rs.47.66 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred further appeal. 3. During first appeal, the assessee stated that no business was carried out in the name of the firm and Account No.30360023604 was disclosed in the return of Shri Atul Aggarwal. The bank account actually belonged to Shri Atul Aggarwal who was assessed under PAN AAZPA- 5970-E with DCIT Circle, Parwanoo. The assessment for Shri Atul Aggarwal was stated to be completed u/s 143(3). However, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. The Ld. AR furnished certificate from State Bank of India for the argument that Bank Account No.30360023604 actually belong to Shri Atul Aggarwal for whom an assessment was already framed on 20-12- 2019. The copy of the assessment order has been placed on record. It

has also been contended that the said bank account has already been accounted for in the return of income of Shri Atul Aggarwal. The Ld. Sr. DR contended that all these facts would require factual verification. 5. From arguments, it would, prima-facie, appear that Bank Account No.30360023604 actually belong to Shri Atul Aggarwal for whom an assessment has already been framed. It is the contention that this account has already been reflected in the return of income of Shri Atul Aggarwal. The firm has maintained only one Bank Account No.34877970285 which also has certain deposits which are to be explained by the assessee-firm. On these facts and considering the fact that the assessment was framed on best judgment basis, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. 6. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th May, 2026. -Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated:18-05-2026 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

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →