NARESH KUMAR,VILLAGE SUDHAL vs. ITO WARD 2, YAMUNA NAGAR, HUDA, JAGADHARI
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘B’ BENCH, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.333/CHANDI/2024
(िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2012-13)
Shri Naresh Kumar
Village Sudhal, P.O. Khera, Tehsil
Jagadhri, Haryana-135001. बनाम/
Vs.
ITO Ward 2,
Yamunanagar 135003
̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BQUPK-4845-C
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)
अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : None
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by :
Dr. Ranjit Kaur, (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
25-03-2025
घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
आदेश / O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi[CIT(A)] dated 07-02-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 16-12-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposit for Rs.14.25 Lacs.
From case records, it emerges that the assessee earned contractual receipts of Rs.20.62 Lacs and declared income of 8% on presumptive basis. However, the case was reopened to verify the source of cash deposit for Rs.12.60 Lacs. In the absence of any cogent reply as forthcoming from the assessee, the deposits as well as presumptive income was added back to the declared income of Rs.4.17 Lacs and total income was assessed at Rs.18.42 Lacs. During first appeal, the assessee furnished sale deed of agricultural land and stated to have received certain amount on sale of agricultural lands. The Ld. CIT(A) granted benefit of Rs.3.52 Lacs and confirmed remaining addition of Rs.10.72 Lacs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. From the facts, it could be seen that the assessee has earned presumptive income for which it is not required to maintain the books of accounts. The assessee has reflected contractual receipts of Rs.20.62 Lacs which are more than the deposits as made by the assessee. As per assessee’s submissions, it has made withdrawals which have subsequently been deposited in the savings bank account. Further, the assessee has returned income of Rs.4.17 Lacs. All these sources have not been factored in while examining the claim of the assessee. In our opinion, it these sources are considered, nothing would remain unexplained in the hands of the assessee. Therefore, we delete the impugned addition of Rs.10.72 Lacs as sustained in the impugned order. The Ld. AO is directed to re-compute the income of the assessee.
The appeal stand allowed.
Order pronounced on 21-04-2025. (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL)
VICE PRESIDENT लेखासद˟ /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 21-04-2025. 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