SINDRI GRAMPANCHYAT KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,PURULIA vs. ITO, WARD 3(2),, PURULIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 141/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 April 2026AY 2017-20186 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee's contention regarding the source of deposits and reconciliation of accounts was not appropriately addressed. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an AOP, deposited ₹14,39,000 in cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Section 69A as unexplained deposits, which was upheld by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits made by the assessee during demonetization were adequately explained and reconciled with its books of accounts and supporting documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 29.11.2025. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) That the Learned CIT(Appeal) NFAC erred in upholding the addition made by A.O. NFAC Delhi of Rs. 1439000/- under section 69A as unexplained deposit under section 69A on the grounds that cash deposited by members are not reconciled with deposit in bank accounts 2) That the assessee submitted full details of cash deposited by members with name address and the amount deposited in bank accounts tallied with the money deposited in bank and is fully reconciled. 3) That assessee submitted full details of S.B.N. deposited during demonetization period with name and address of the depositor to the ITA No(s). 141/KOL/2026 Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited. Learned CIT (Appeal) and they never questioned the genuineness of the depositors. 4) That the assessee submitted copy of cash book to the CIT (Appeal) where the money received from members were recorded and also deposit to bank accounts are shown and are fully reconciled. 5) That section 69A under which the addition has confirmed by the CIT (Appeal) state as follows: Where in any financial year the assessee is found to be owner of any money, bullion, jewelry or other valuable article and such money, bullion, jewelery or valuable article is not recorded in the books of accounts, if any, maintained by him for any source of income and the assessee offer no explanation about the money jewellery or other valuable article or the explanation offered by him is not in the opinion the Assessing officer satisfactory, the money and the value of the billion jewellery and other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee fore that financial year 6) That here the money received by the assessee from its members were recorded in the cash book and deposit to banks are recorded in cash book. The copy of Cash Book was given to CIT(A) NFAC CIT. The sources of the deposit were explained by giving details of the depositors with name and address of the depositors. 7) That the A.O. & Learned CIT (Appeal) never questioned the geniuses of the depositor so the addition made by the CIT(A) NFAC should be deleted. 8) That in recent decision of "C" Bench I.T.A.T. Kolkata in the case of Sridharpur Co-Operative Bank vs ITO Ward 3 (2) Burdwan in similar circumstances has deleted the addition made under section 69A. The copy of the judgment is attached. 9) That various Tribunals have also deleted the additions under similar circumstances 10) That the list of depositor copy of Cash Book and bank statements are attached for your kind perusal 11) That any other ground if any shall be lurged at the time of hearing.”

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP (Co- operative society) and was engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members. It had not filed the return of income for the AY 2017-18. As per the information available with the Income Tax Department, the assessee had made cash deposits amounting to ITA No(s). 141/KOL/2026 Assessment Year(s) 2017-18 Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited. ₹14,39,000/- [₹5,00,000/- in Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank, Sindri (Branch: Fatepur-Sindri, Dt. Purulia) and ₹9,39,000/- in Purulia Central co-operative Bank (103 Balrampur Branch)] during the demonetization period. The assessment of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO'). In response thereof, the assessee filed the return of income on 15.01.2022 declaring ‘NIL’ income. Thereafter, notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and show cause were issued on various dates. Subsequently, the Ld. AO made an addition of ₹14,39,000/- u/s 69A of the Act as unaccounted money in the form of Specified Bank Notes, determining the total income of the assessee at ₹14,39,000/- under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who considered the assessment/reassessment order, the statement of facts, the grounds of appeal and the submissions furnished during the appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that Ground nos. 1 to 13 were similar in nature and related to the addition made by the Ld. AO for ₹14,39,000/- on account of the cash deposits in the bank accounts during the demonetization period. The Ld. CIT(A) observed that no supporting documents had been produced by the assessee along with the cash book at any stage of the proceedings, be it the appellate or the assessment stage. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed all the grounds of appeal and confirmed the addition of ₹14,39,000/- made by the Ld. AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4.

Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.

Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited.

5.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the case was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested that the same may be upheld.

6.

We have considered the facts of the case, the grounds of appeal and the arguments of the Ld. DR and the orders of the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A). Apparently, the assessee’s contention that the source of the deposit was submitted before the Ld. AO and the books of account were audited by the government auditor and therefore, the genuineness of the transactions could not be disputed has not been appropriately addressed. It is mentioned in the appellate order that the assessee had also filed a list of depositors with name and address and also the amount deposited and had also furnished the copy of pass book yet the evidence filed was brushed aside. After examining the facts of the case and the law, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal to him for disposal of the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on merit by passing a speaking order. The assessee shall furnish the reconciliation of the transactions listed in the cash book with the total cash deposits of ₹ 14,39,000/- made in the bank account which shall be considered by the Ld. CIT(A) and after considering the submission of this assessee, the appeal should be decided afresh. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission it wants to make in support of its grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 shall also be followed and an opportunity of being heard may be provided to the Ld. AO, if required. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the assessee in the appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22nd April, 2026. [Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 22.04.2026 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.)

Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited. Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Sindri Grampanchyat Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited, Sindri Fathepur, Barabazar, Purulia, West Bengal, 723127. 2. ITO, Ward-3(2), Purulia.

3.

CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.

4.

CIT-

5.

CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

6.

Guard File. //// By order

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →