SUNDER BAI,VPO. SUNDRAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NARNAUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8362/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 January 2026AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the cash received from the sale of agricultural lands was deposited in the bank account. Therefore, the addition of Rs.25.41 lakhs as income from undisclosed sources was not justified.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 concerns cash deposits of Rs.25.41 lakhs made in a bank account, which the lower authorities treated as income from undisclosed sources. The assessee had sold agricultural lands for Rs.32.50 lakhs, including Rs.25 lakhs in cash.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits in a bank account, arising from the sale of agricultural land, can be treated as income from undisclosed sources.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Krishan, Adv. (Through VC)
Hearing: 22.01.2026Pronounced: 22.01.2026

DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1048408755(1), dated 03.01.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s.

143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It transpires during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ action treating her cash deposits amounting to Rs.25.41 lakhs made in Punjab & National Bank in Financial Year 2011-12 as income from “undisclosed” sources; in assessment order dated 13.11.2019 and upheld in lower appellate discussion.

3.

That being the case, the assessee has referred to paras 5.3 and 5.4 in the lower appellate discussion, wherein, it is revealed that she had sold her agricultural lands on 20.07.2012 for Rs.32.50 lakhs which included a cash amount of Rs.25 lakh.

The necessary inference would arise therefore is that the very cash received as sale consideration has been deposited in her bank account in the impugned assessment year. I accordingly find no merit in the impugned addition of Rs.25.41 lakhs made in the assessee’s hands which is hereby deleted in very terms.

4.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →