Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee deposited Rs. 81,89,200/- in bank accounts, claiming it as sale proceeds or from debtors. The Assessing Officer added this amount as undisclosed income for AY 2017-18, and the CIT(A) upheld the addition.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee provided sufficient details of cash deposits, including cash sales and receipts from debtors, and no discrepancies were pointed out by the revenue authorities. The cash deposits during the demonetization period were thus proved.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of cash deposits as unexplained income is justified when the assessee has provided sufficient evidence of its source, especially during the demonetization period.
Sections Cited
68, 143(2), 142(1), 199C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH
Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble
आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 15-04- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18.
The grounds of appeal
are as under:- “1. The Learned CIT (A) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 81,89,200 u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit in bank accounts. 2 The Learned CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating the facts that the Amount deposited in respective bank accounts is either out of sale proceed, cash deposit in bank which was withdrawal from same or another banks and deposited from earlier debtors as mentioned in cash book filed before him.
3. The Learned CIT (A) has erred in not passing any speaking order regarding the materials filed before him and only put Dipesh Chandrakant Shah, A.Y. 2017-18 emphasize on declaration form no. u/s 199C of Finance Act 2016 filed by the appellant of Rs. 25,00,000/- though it is not finalise. The aforesaid grounds are without prejudice to each other and the appellant craves leave to add/delete/alter and/or amend any of grounds as aforesaid as and when necessary.”
The assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2017-18 on 14-11-017 declaring total income of Rs. 3,82,210/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act dated 09-08-2018 was issued. Subsequently, notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 26-08-2019 and 13-11-2019 were issued and served upon the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee is an individual and is doing the business of trading in stationary items. The assessee deposited cash of Rs. 81,89,200/- in his bank accounts maintained with Saranpur Co.op Bank Ltd., Nutal Nagarik Sahakari Bank and the United Co-op. Bank Ltd. In response to the notices, the assessee filed reply dated 19-12-2019 thereby stating that the assessee filed Form 1 declaration u/s. 199C of the Finance Act, 2016 and Form No. 2, Certificate of Declaration issued in this regard. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee failed to submit the proof and therefore made addition of Rs. 81,89,200/- as undisclosed income.
Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The ld. A.R. submitted that the amount deposited in the respective bank accounts either sale proceeds or cash deposits through any bank which was withdrawn from same or another banks and deposited from earlier debtors as mentioned in cash book filed before the Assessing Officer. The ld. A.R. submitted 2 Dipesh Chandrakant Shah, A.Y. 2017-18 that the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) has not taken into account the details and evidences put forward it before and only emphasis from declaration form, the ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee filed the cash flow statement as well as details of mandatory cash flow statement along with VAT annual return, confirmation, identity proof, copy of ITR for the relatives from whom the gift received and other bank statements.
The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that for the period of 01-04-2016 to 31-12-2016, the assessee has received cash to the extent of Rs. 84,64,982/- and some of the cash was withdrawn in this component as well. The assessee deposited total cash of Rs. 82,11,700/-. The assessee has given the details of cash deposit from 01-04-2016 till 08-11-2016 which amounts 21,99,700/- and that also in only one bank itself. The assessee has given the other two bank receipts of cash details which amounts 27,52,000/- and even in cash received in one of the banks was 17,52,300/-. The assessee also received cash sales and cash received from debtors which amounts 34,00,183/-. Thus, the assessee was having sufficient cash in hand prior to period 09-11-2016 to 31-12-2016. Thus, the assessee has given all these details to the Assessing Officer as well as to the CIT(A) and no discrepancy has been pointed out either by CIT(A) or by the Assessing Officer in assessee’s cash book as well as the statement in respect of withdrawal from each bank and the deposit to that effect. Thus, the assessee has proved the cash deposits during demonetization period and Dipesh Chandrakant Shah, A.Y. 2017-18 therefore the CIT(A) as well as Assessing Officer was not right in making addition of the said amount. The appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17-11-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 17/11/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद