SAURAV MITTAL,SILIGURI vs. I.T.O., WARD - 2(3),, SILIGURI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2077/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 January 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal ruled that the cash gifts were received in the previous assessment year. The deposits in the impugned assessment year were made from the opening cash balance, not from fresh receipts in the current year. Therefore, any addition for unexplained marriage gifts should have been made in the year of receipt (AY 2016-17), not in the present assessment year (AY 2017-18).

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited ₹51,45,000/- in a bank account during AY 2017-18, claiming it originated from cash marriage gifts received in the preceding year (AY 2016-17). The Assessing Officer added this amount as unexplained money under Section 69A and 115BBE, which was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) due to lack of substantiation regarding the genuineness of gifts and opening cash balance.

What were the issues?

Can an addition for unexplained cash marriage gifts be made in a subsequent assessment year if the cash was received in a prior year and merely deposited from the opening balance in the current year?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Bansal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, DR
Hearing: 06.01.2025Pronounced: 15.01.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 20.08.2024 for the AY 2017-18.

2.

The only issue raised by the assessee in various grounds of appeal is against the confirmation of addition of ₹51,45,000/- by the ld. CIT (A) as made by the ld. AO u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposited during the relevant financial year into the bank account.

3.

The facts in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 29.03.2018, declaring total income of ₹8,02,930/-. The case of the

4.

In the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal by observing and holding as under:-

“7.3. In the instant case also, the appellant was unable to provide confirmation of the purported gifts received during his marriage. The appellant was also unable to furnish the veracity of opening cash balance as the creditworthiness of the donors and the genuineness of gifts itself was not proved. The appellant was unable to provide confirmation from any of the purported donors, and as the sources claimed by the appellant are not proved with cogent reasoning and confirmation, the veracity of cash balance and its sources itself is to be treated as unexplained. The Income Tax Returns filed by the appellant for the AY 2016- 17 and AY 2017-18 are perused in the course of appellate proceedings. It is noticed from the ITR filed by the appellant that no details regarding purported gifts were furnished in the return of income filed by the appellant for the AY 2016-17 and the appellant has also not furnished any details of purported cash balance available with him as on 31.03.2016. Thus, as the appellant has failed

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.01.2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →