SMT PUSHPALATA MARUTI GHULE,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -14, PUNE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided a plausible explanation for the cash deposit, citing withdrawals from her bank account and agricultural receipts. The authorities below had not adequately considered this explanation.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited Rs. 13,73,000 in cash into her bank account. The Assessing Officer treated this as unexplained income, and the CIT(A) confirmed the addition, suspecting it was 'on-money' from a property sale.
What were the issues?
Whether the cash deposited in the bank account by the assessee was unexplained income. Whether the explanation provided by the assessee regarding the source of funds was sufficient.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
आदेश / ORDER
PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 25-03-2019 in relation to the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The appeal is time barred by 866 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit stating the reasons for the delay, with which I am satisfied. The delay is, therefore, condoned and the appeal is admitted for disposal on merits. 3. The only issue raised in this appeal is the confirmation of addition of Rs.13,73,000/- on account of cash deposited in bank account.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who filed return declaring total income of Rs.30,95,781/-.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that a sum of Rs.13,73,000/- was deposited in cash in the bank account of the assessee maintained with Sadhna Sahakari Bank Ltd. Pune. On being called upon to explain the source of deposit in the bank account, the assessee submitted that she was a widow and staying with her only handicapped dependant son having some cultivable land. Considering the fact that the assessee’s land holding was less and income therefrom was insufficient to justify the availability of cash deposited in the bank, the AO treated sum of Rs.13.73 lakh as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition by observing that the assessee sold some property during the year under consideration and this amount was nothing but on-money received by her which was deposited in the bank account. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. The assessee has tendered an explanation before the ld. CIT(A) which has been recorded by the CIT(A) in the order stating that her date-wise agricultural income was Rs.3,62,700/-. In addition, she made withdrawals date-wise totalling Rs.10,72,000/- from her bank account with total amount coming to Rs.14.34 lakh and it was out of this amount, that she deposited Rs.13.73 lakh in the bank account that has been added by the AO. The authorities below have simply brushed aside the explanation of the assessee without showing that such agricultural receipts/withdrawals from the bank were used elsewhere. Taking into consideration the entirety of facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am satisfied that the assessee has genuinely explained the source of deposits in the bank account amounting to Rs.13.73 lakh as emanating from the withdrawals made from the bank account during the same year as well as certain agricultural receipts. I, therefore, order to delete the addition.
In the result, the appeal is allowed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01st August, 2022.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026