Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a non-filer for AY 2011-12, deposited Rs.13,13,363/- in his savings account. The Assessing Officer treated this as unexplained cash under Section 69A and made an addition. The assessee claimed the funds were donations for a religious trust where he was the founder chairman, and the account was opened in his name for convenience as the trust lacked its own bank account.
Held
The Tribunal held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer was not called for. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the balance sheet, income and expenditure account, and bank statement submitted by the assessee, which showed the cash deposits were related to donations for the trust.
Key Issues
Whether the cash deposits in the assessee's bank account, claimed to be donations for a religious trust, could be treated as unexplained income under Section 69A without properly considering the documentary evidence submitted by the assessee.
Sections Cited
250, 69A, 147, 148, 142(1), 144, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
(Assessment Year: 2011-12) Yusufbhai Adambhai Vahora, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ismail Nagar, Ward-1, B/H Rolling Mill,Bhalej Road, Anand. Anand-388001 [PAN :AQUOM8984 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Adjournment Application Filed Respondent by: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 29.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 26.12.2024 passed by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-3, Bengaluru, under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
01. The Assessing Officer as well as Ld.CIT(Appeals) both are erred in law in making addition of Rs.13,13,363/- for cash deposited in bank account as unexplained cash u/s.69A of the Act. 02 The Assessing Officer as well as Ld.CIT(Appeals) both are also erred in law in treating cash deposited in bank account of Rs.13,13,363/- as unexplained cash deposit us. 69A of the Act without appreciating the facts.
03. The order of Assessing Officer is illegal against the natural justice and good conscience.”
The facts of the case are that assessee is a Molana (Islamic religious preacher) and also the founder Chairman (Mutvalli) of a religious namely Masjide Abubakar Committee, situated Near Old Jakat Naka, Bhalej Road, Anand. The said trust is engaged in providing religious education to students Yusufbhai A Vahora Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– free of cost. At present the students availing the benefit of this institution are approx. 110 students. The said trust was established on 25.03.2004 and it is registered with the Waqf Board, Gandhinagar.
The assessee is non-filer during the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer, found that assessee has deposited cash in the savings bank account more than the basic exemption limit but failed to file the return of income. Therefore, to verify the source of the cash deposits made, the Assessing Officer reopened the case of the assessee under the provisions of section 147 of the IT Act and issued notice under section 148 of the IT Act on 27/03/2018 to the assessee requiring him to file the return of income. The assessee filed the return of income in response to the notice under section 148 of the IT Act on 19/10/2018 declaring income of Rs. 1,55,050/-. The Assessing Officer further issued notices u/s 142(1) and 144 of the IT Act requiring the assessee to submit documentary evidence in support of source of cash deposit made in the bank account maintained in his name. As the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued during assessment, therefore, the Assessing Officer considered the cash deposit of Rs.13,13,363/- as unexplained money under the provisions of section 69A of the IT Act and concluded the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 on 27/12/2018 by assessing total income at Rs. 14,68,413/-.
Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the the assessee has filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The revenue found that the assessee had deposited Rs.13,13,363/- in his savings account and owing to non-compliance to the notices issued, the Yusufbhai A Vahora Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– Assessing Officer made addition of same amount during the assessment proceedings. Before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee submitted that the assessee was a founder Chairman of the Trust imparting education to 110 students. Since the Trust had no bank account in order to facilitate the donations, a bank account has been opened in the name of the assessee wherein the donations of Rs.6,78,727/- have been received. The assessee has submitted the income and expenditure statement as well as bank statement before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the balance sheet, income & expenditure account and the bank account shown in the balance-sheet in which the same cash deposits have been made. Hence keeping in view the entirety of the facts specific to the instant case, the name of the assessee on the bank account is only for the convenience purpose, we hold that no addition in this case is called for.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.09.2025