VENKATA KRISHNA KISHORE BABU BOGGARAPU,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS,WARD-1, KURNOOL
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's claim, considering his declared income and the possibility of accumulating the amount over time. The addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was deemed inappropriate.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited Rs. 4 lakhs in his bank account during demonetization, claiming Rs. 3,38,082/- as accumulated cash on hand. The Assessing Officer rejected this explanation and made an addition, which was upheld by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of Rs. 3,38,082/- as unexplained cash under Section 69A was justified, considering the assessee's declared income and explanation of accumulated cash.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “SMC”, HYDERABAD
ORDER This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1035074331(1), dated 2017-18 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2017-18.
The assessee has raised five grounds in his appeal however, the crux of the issue is that:
“The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of the Ld. A.O. who had made addition of Rs. 3,38,082/- towards unexplained cash U/s. 69A of the Act.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year on 10/07/2017 declaring total income of Rs. 3,15,350/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny since he has deposited cash in the bank account during the demonetization period. During the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Ld. A.O. observed that the assessee has deposited Rs. 4 lakhs in his Canara Bank account. On query, it was explained that the amount of Rs. 3,38,082/- was accumulated cash on hand as on 1/4/2016. The Ld. A.O. rejected the submissions of the assessee and made addition of Rs. 3,38,082/-. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition by agreeing with his view.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing the appeal to represent the case. However, on examining the orders of the Ld. A.O. and the Ld. CIT(A), I do not find any merit. It is evident from the return filed by the assessee that for the relevant assessment year he had declared an income of Rs. 3,15,350/-. Therefore, there is every possibility for the assessee to accumulate a meagre amount of Rs. 3,38,082/- over a period of time. In these circumstances, making addition of Rs. Rs. 3,38,082/- in the hands of the assessee invoking the provisions of section 69A is not appropriate. Therefore, I hereby direct the Ld. A.O. to delete the addition of Rs. 3,38,082/- which was further sustained by the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Pronounced in the open Court on the 05th January, 2022.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026