SARVESH KUMAR KAUSHIK ,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD - 3(3), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3791/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 December 2024AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities could not have added the entire cash deposits as unexplained. While the assessee could not fully prove the source, a lump sum addition of Rs. 2,58,000/- was deemed just and proper in the peculiar facts of the case, granting the assessee a relief of Rs. 10,00,000/-. This decision is not to be treated as a precedent.

What were the facts?

The appeal concerns the treatment of the assessee's cash deposits of Rs. 12,58,000/- as unexplained by the lower appellate authorities for Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee contended that the source of these deposits was from the sale of agricultural land and prior cash withdrawals, providing a detailed paper book and cash flow chart to support this claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authorities were correct in treating the assessee's entire cash deposits of Rs. 12,58,000/- as unexplained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 26.12.2024Pronounced: 26.12.2024

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 28.06.2024 in DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066201684(1), in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming straightway to sole substantive issue between the parties challenging correctness of the learned lower appellate authorities action treating the assessee’s cash deposits of Rs.12,58,000/- as unexplained learned counsel has invited the undersigned’s attention to his detailed paper book running into 133 pages indicating him to have owned and transferred agricultural land in past followed by cash receipts in the relevant previous year as well a combined cash flow chart that

4.

It is in the light of these clinching facts emerging from the case file that the tribunal of the considered view that the learned lower authorities could not have added the assessee’s entire cash deposits as unexplained. The facts also remains that the he has not able to satisfactorily prove the source of his cash as attributable to his entire earlier cash withdrawals. Be that as it may, it is deemed appropriate in these peculiar facts that a lump sum addition of Rs.2,58,000/- only be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 10,00,000/- in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26/12/2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →