Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal pertained to the assessment year 2017-18. The additions were made on grounds of opening cash on hand, unexplained gifts, and unexplained expenditure.
Held
The tribunal held that the opening cash on hand was sufficiently explained by the assessee by referring to the previous year's return. The gifts were considered genuine as details of the donor, who was the assessee's father, were provided, including bank statements and cash withdrawals. The addition for unexplained expenditure was a corollary to the cash on hand issue.
Key Issues
Whether the opening cash on hand, gifts received, and expenditures were sufficiently explained and not taxable.
Sections Cited
68, 69C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT AND MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1022/SRT/2024 (Assessment Year:2017-18) Pratikkumar Rameshbhai The ITO, Parmar, Tarsadi-Kosamba Vs. Ward-1, PAN : BYXPP3979F Bardoli
(Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate Respondent by: Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 06.04.2026
O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 17-11-2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18.
The addition was made on the ground of opening cash on hand and treated the same as unexplained u/s. 68 of the Act. The assessee submitted that the assessee has given details of cash balance as on 31-03-2016 and the same was reported in the return of income for A.Y. 2016-17. From the perusal of records, it appears in the details. Thus, the addition u/s. 68 is thoroughly explained by the assessee. Thus ground no. 1 is allowed.
ITA No. 1022/Srt/2024 PratikkumarRameshbhai Parmar Vs. ITO Asst.Year :2017-18 - 2–
As regards ground no. 2, the gift deed and gift received from the donors, the assessee has shown the credibility of Rameshbhai Patel as the said Rameshbhai Patel was father of the assessee and the relevant details were given such as bank statements and cash withdrawals of the father. Thus, the gift was genuine. Hence, ground no. 2 is allowed.
As regards ground no. 3 relating to addition on account unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C, the same is corollary to ground no. 1 and hence allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order is pronounced in the open Court on 06.04.2026
Sd/- Sd/-
(DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) VICE-PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat; Dated 06/04/2026 ak आदेशक���त�ल�पअ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent. 3. संबं�धतआयकरआयु�त/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु�त ( अपील ) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय��त�न�ध , आयकरअपील(यअ�धकरण , /DR,ITAT, Surat, 6. गाड+फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायकपंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकरअपील(यअ�धकरण ITAT, Surat