RISHABH AGARWAL,MEERUT vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE MEERUT, MEERUT

ITA 5154/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs.1,43,624/- on account of unexplained cash was not sustainable. The Tribunal noted that during the search, Rs.23,69,500/- in cash was found and seized. The AO had treated half of this as unexplained money in the assessee's hands. The assessee had provided a bifurcation of the seized cash, including affidavits from Shri Rajeev Agarwal and Mrs. Manisha Agarwal, admitting ownership of Rs.2,20,468/- and Rs.2,14,270/-, respectively. These affidavits confirmed that the cash owned by them was part of the total cash seized and had been reflected in their respective personal books of account. The assessee admitted only Rs.61,261/- as his own, also purportedly recorded in his personal books. The Tribunal reasoned that once cash amounts were owned by Shri Rajeev Agarwal and Mrs. Manisha Agarwal and accounted for in their books, there was no plausible reason to make an addition of that cash in the hands of the assessee. The addition of Rs.1,43,624/-, being part of the cash seized during the search and claimed by other family members, was therefore directed to be deleted. The issue of double taxation was implicitly addressed by this reasoning.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Rishabh Agarwal, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench, challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida, dated 06.04.2026, for Assessment Year 2022-23. The appeal concerns an addition of Rs.1,43,624/- on account of unexplained cash, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). A search action on 08.03.2022, on the Sharda Group of Family and Agarwal Family, led to the seizure of unaccounted cash and jewellery. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions of Rs.11,84,750/- for unexplained money and Rs.8,03,469/- for unexplained jewellery. The CIT(A) deleted the addition for jewellery. Regarding cash, out of Rs.23,69,500/- found, Rs.18,82,251/- was attributed to M/s. Idle Laminates P. Ltd. The CIT(A) deleted Rs.2,00,000/- from the remaining Rs.4,87,248/- and confirmed the rest, with one half share added to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs.1,43,624/- on account of unexplained cash, confirmed by the CIT(A), is sustainable in law, particularly in light of affidavits from other family members claiming ownership of portions of the seized cash, thereby potentially leading to double taxation? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that a search on 08.03.2022, resulted in the seizure of cash. The AO made additions for unexplained money and jewellery. The CIT(A) deleted the jewellery addition. Regarding cash, the assessee contended that out of Rs.4,87,248/- remaining after attributing a portion to M/s. Idle Laminates P. Ltd., the CIT(A) deleted Rs.2,00,000/- and confirmed the rest. The assessee provided a bifurcation of the Rs.4,87,248/- cash: Rajeev Agarwal (Rs.2,20,468/-), Rishabh Agarwal (Rs.61,261/-), and Manisha Agarwal (Rs.2,14,270/-). The assessee submitted that Rajeev Agarwal and Manisha Agarwal had sworn affidavits confirming ownership of their respective amounts, which were reflected in their personal books of account. The assessee argued that once these amounts are owned by family members and accounted for, adding any part of it to the assessee's income would result in double taxation. The assessee relied on the principle that accounted income cannot be taxed twice. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue, through its Sr. DR, relied on the findings of the CIT(A) and prayed for the dismissal of the assessee's appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Respondent: Shri Nirmal Nangia, Sr.DR

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 06.04.2026, for Assessment Year 2022-

23.2.

The solitary issue assailed by the assessee in the present appeal is, addition of Rs.1,43,624/- on account unexplained cash confirmed by the CIT(A).

3.

Shri Shiv Kumar Gupta, appearing on behalf of the assessee subm

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →