KULVINDER SINGH,SANGRUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1,, SANGRUR
आयकर अपील
य अ धकरण,चडीगढ़ यायपीठ, चडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION BENCH, “SMC” CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.984/CHD/2024
नधारण वष / Assessment Year : 2017-18
Shri Kulvinder Singh,
Village – Gagarpur,
Ward – 1,
Sangrur.
थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: FLQPS1994R
अपीलाथ/Appellant
यथ/Respondent
नधारती क ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Narinder Sharma, Advocate
राजव क ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
सुनवाई क तार"ख/Date of Hearing
: 17.04.2025
उदघोषणा क तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025
PHYSICAL HEARING
आदेश/Order
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [in short referred to as CIT(A)] dated 27.02.2024 relating to A.Y.
2017-18. 2. The appeal is time barred by 146 days. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed.
ITA No. 984/Chd-2024
A.Y. 2017-18
2
Considering the averments made in the application, the delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned.
3. The assessee in this appeal has contested the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the AO of Rs.14,79,970/- by treating the cash amount deposited during demonetization period as income of the assessee from unexplained sources.
4. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to copy of the bank entries of deposit and withdrawal during the period as reproduced in para 2.6
of the impugned order of the CIT(A). A perusal of the said chart reveals that the assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.15,78,000/- on 07.10.2016 from his bank account No.
50200020596701. There are other entries of withdrawal and re-deposit which have also been duly reproduced in the said chart. It has been explained that the assessee had withdrawn the said amount of Rs.15,78,000/- only on 07.10.2016 for some domestic purposes, however, soon after the demonetization scheme was announced and the assessee per force had to re-deposit the said amount in his bank account.
ITA No. 984/Chd-2024
A.Y. 2017-18
3
The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid facts on this file. 6. In view of this, I do not find any justification on the part of the lower authorities in making/confirming the impugned addition, same is, accordingly, ordered to be deleted. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced on 30.04.2025. ( SANJAY GARG)
यायक सद य/ Judicial Member
“Poonam.”
आदेश क त)ल*प अ+े*षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ/ The Appellant 2. यथ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु,त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु,त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. *वभागीय त न/ध, आयकर अपील"य आ/धकरण, च1डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडफाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/