ARUN PANWAR,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, YAMUNA NAGAR
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
HYBRID HEARING
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.328/CHANDI/2025
(िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2017-18)
Shri Arun Panwar
H No 76 A Chopra Garden
Haryana. 135001
बनाम/ Vs.
ITO Ward -1
Model Town
Yamunanagar-605602
˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. CEHPS-3171-M
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)
अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Arvind Kumar (CA)(Virtual Mode)– Ld. AR
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by :
Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl.CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
09-09-2025
घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
15/09/2025
आदेश / O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 14-01-2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s. 144 of the Act on 15-10-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposit for Rs.30.90 Lacs u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of 2
the Act. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.
2. Upon perusal of assessee’s bank account as maintained with SBI,
Faridabad, it was noted by Ld. AO that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.30.90 Lacs between 13-11-2016 to 28-11-2016. Accordingly, the assessee was directed to explain the sources thereof. The assessee stated that certain amount was received through cheque from his father in his HDFC Bank Account. Since he was looking to purchase a plot in Faridabad, he withdrew the money on 08-04-2015 and gave token money to the seller. Due to some issues, the deal did not fructify and the refund was received from the seller during October, 2016 which was re-deposited in the said bank account. However, Ld. AO rejected the same for want of documentary evidences and added the deposits u/s 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
3. The undisputed fact that emerges is that the assessee has received amount of Rs.30 Lacs from his father through banking channels during September, 2014. The amount of Rs.31 Lacs was withdrawn on 08-04-2015 and it is stated to be used to carry out certain land deal. However, the deal did not fructify and the assessee received the refund from the seller. The said refund was re-deposited in assessee’s bank account between 13-11-2016 to 28-11-2016. There is no finding of fact by Ld. AO that the cash was utilized by the assessee elsewhere. Therefore, the source of the deposits has to be accepted on the logic that even if it is presumed that no such advance was given by 3
the assessee as no document has been furnished to that effect, the fact remain that the assessee has made cash withdrawals of Rs.31
Lacs on 08-04-2015 which has ultimately been sourced from amount transferred by assessee’s father to the assessee through banking channels. The presumption would arise in assessee’s favor that the same amount was re-deposited by the assessee owing to demonetization. Therefore, we delete the impugned addition. No other ground has been urged in the appeal.
4. The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order.
Order pronounced on 15/09/2025 (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL)
VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 15/09/2025
आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent
3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT
4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR
5. गाडŊफाईल/GF