MAJOR SINGH,KAITHAL vs. ITO, WARD-1, KAITHAL
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE HON’BLE Shri RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT,
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकरअपील सं. / ITA No.138/CHANDI/2024
(िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2012-13)
Shri Major Singh S/o Shri Gasitu Ram
Village Malikpur, Tehsil Siswan
Kaithal-136027 Haryana.
बनाम/
Vs.
ITO- Ward 1
Kaithal-136027. ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. CCVPS-1180-E
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)
अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by :
Shri Pranav Jain (Advocate) – Ld. AR
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by :
Dr. Ranjeet Kaur – Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
04-03-2025
घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
12-03-2025
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 20-11-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 29-11-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposit for Rs.40.32 Lacs. Having heard rival submissions and upon 2
perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under. The registry has noted delay of 27 days which stand condoned.
2. In the assessment order, it was observed by Ld. AO that the assessee made cash deposits in its bank account as maintained with SBI, Siwan branch. Accordingly, the assessee was directed to substantiate the sources thereof. In the absence of any explanation as forthcoming from the assessee, Ld. AO treated the said deposits as income from undisclosed sources and framed the assessment on best judgment basis.
3. During appellate proceedings, the assessee stated that it was engaged in selling recharge coupons of IDEA company on which he was getting commission. The said deposits were nothing but sale proceeds of business activities. The same were subjected to remand proceedings wherein Ld. AO stated that the assessee failed to file any agreement to prove the same. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment against which the assessee is in further appeal before us.
3. The perusal of bank statement, as placed on record, would show that substantial cash deposits have been utilized by the assessee to make the payment to Idea Cellular Ltd. The summary of payment so made by the assessee to Idea Cellular Ltd. has been placed on Page
Nos. 21 to 23 of the paper book. It could be seen that the assessee has paid aggregate payment of Rs.34.93 Lacs to Idea Cellular Ltd. A perusal of Form 26AS as placed on Page Nos. 28 to 32 would confirm that the assessee has earned commission income on which TDS has been deducted by the payer. All these facts substantiate the claim of 3
the assessee. The assessee has filed regular return of income on 12-
02-2013 declaring business income of Rs.2.01 Lacs wherein the assessee has taken into account the aforesaid commission receipts.
The Ld. AO has not considered the same. On these facts, it could very well be concluded that the aforesaid receipts could not be held to be income from undisclosed sources from any angle. 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 12-03-2025. (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL)
VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद˟ /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 12-03-2025
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