SATHI MANGAYAMMA,EAST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KAKINADA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 119/VIZ/2025Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: us : “1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.17,27,120 made by the assessing officer by estimating profit computed @ 8% of the total deposits Rs.2,15,89,000 excluding the cash deposits during demonetization period. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in s1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the cash deposits during the demonetization period could not be sourced from pre-demonetization cash or business sales. However, it directed the AO to apply the pre-amended tax rate of 30% under Section 115BBE for these unexplained cash deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared an income of Rs. 3,40,200 for AY 2017-18. During scrutiny, the Assessing Officer (AO) noted significant cash and online credits in the assessee's bank account, including Rs. 20,00,500 during the demonetization period.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits during demonetization are unexplained income and the applicability of the amended Section 115BBE rate for AY 2017-18.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench

For Appellant: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)

आदेशकी प्रतततिति अग्रेतषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. तिर्ााररती/The Assessee : Sathi Mangayamma, R/o.D.No.7-7-2, Near GRSA Club, Ramachandra Puram, G. Mamidada, East Godavari District. 2. राजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2, Kakinada.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →