CHARAN SINGH,VPO TOPRA KALAN vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चीगढ़ ायपीठ,चीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘SMC BENCH’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.85/CHD/2025
िनधारणवष / Assessment Year : 2017-18
Charan Singh
S/o. Sh. Mansa Ram
257, VPO-Topra Kalan,
Tesil Jagadhri Yamunagar
Haryana – 135 133
बनाम
The ITO,
Ward-1,
Yamunagar
Haryana 135 133
थायीलेखासं./PAN NO. DKAPS 0306 G
अपीलाथ/Appellant
थ/Respondent
( PHYSICAL HEARING )
िनधा रतीकीओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Vibhore Garg, CA
राज कीओरसे/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT, Sr.DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
29/05/2025
उदघोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement
:
22/08/2025
आदेश/Order
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20/11/2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi
[hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year (AY)
2017-18. 2. The assessee, in this appeal, is aggrieved by the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.4,45,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unexplained cash credits in the bank account of the assessee during the demonetization period. The AO during the assessment proceedings noticed that there was a substantial cash deposit of Rs.17,95,500/-in the two bank accounts of ITA 85-Chd-2025
Charan Singh vs. ITO Ward-1
AY 2017-18
2
the assessee, i.e. Rs.2 lakhs in the Punjab National Bank Account and Rs.15,95,500/- in HDFC Bank account during the demonetization period, i.e. 09/11/2016 to 30/12/2016 in the old currency. He show- caused the assessee to prove the source of the aforesaid cash deposits.
In reply, the assessee explained that the HDFC bank account was a joint credit limit of the assessee along with his family members, namely, Shri Gulshan Lal (brother of the assessee), Smt.Mahindro
Devi (Wife of the assessee and Smt.Sunita Devi (Brother’s wife). It was explained that the assessee’s family was an agriculturist family and that a joint credit limit family account was opened, wherein all the family members deposited the cash available with them. The assessee further explained the source of the deposits to the AO. The AO accepted the source of deposit amounting to Rs.9,50,000/- being amount received from sale of agriculture produce and livestock, etc.
The assessee further explained that the remaining amount was out of past personal savings of each member of the family which was required to be deposited as per the government guidelines during the demonetization period, the same being in the old currency. The assessee claimed Rs.2,35,500/- were deposited out of past personal savings of the assessee, Rs.1,95,000/- out of personal savings of his wife, Rs.2,25,000/- out of personal savings of his brother Gulshan
Lal and Rs.1,91,000/- by his brother’s wife Smt.Sunita Devi, totaling to Rs.8,45,500/-. The AO, in this respect, accepted Rs.1 lakh each of family member as deposited out of past savings and made the addition of remaining amount of Rs.4,45,500/- as unexplained cash deposits.
3. The Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by the AO.
4. I have gone through the record. Admittedly, the bank account in question was a joint family account, wherein all the four family
ITA 85-Chd-2025
Charan Singh vs. ITO Ward-1
AY 2017-18
3
members used to deposit and withdraw the amount. The Ld.Counsel has relied upon the CBDT Instruction No.03/2017 dated 21/07/2017, wherein the CBDT has clarified that in case of any individual not having any business income, no further verification is required to be made if total cash deposited during the demonetization period is upto
Rs.2.5 lakhs. The Ld.Counsel relying upon the Circular submitted that each of the family member has claimed past savings less than Rs.2.5 lakhs. That the AO should have given benefit of Rs.2.5 lakhs deposit to each member as per CBDT Instruction.
The Ld.DR, however, relied upon the findings of the lower authorities.
I have considered rival submissions and gone through the record. In this case, it is an admitted fact that the bank account in question was a joint family account, wherein, all the members of the family used to deposit their savings, etc. A meagre sum of approximately Rs.2 lakhs each was deposited by all the four family members which can be well considered to be out of past savings of each of the family members of the assessee. Even the CBDT also instructed that no verification should be made of regarding the deposit of an amount of Rs.2.5 lakhs in case of an individual. Under these circumstances, in my view, the source of cash deposit stood explained. The AO, in my view, was not justified in making the impugned addition and the same is hereby ordered to be deleted.
ITA 85-Chd-2025
Charan Singh vs. ITO Ward-1
AY 2017-18
4
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced on 22/08/2025 (SANJAY GARG)
Judicial Member
आदेशकीितिलिपअ(ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ/ The Appellant
2. थ/ The Respondent
3. आयकरआयु)/ CIT
4. िवभागीयितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयआिधकरण, च-ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
5. गाडफाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायकपंजीकार/