SANJEEV KUMAR GARG,DADRI vs. ITO,WARD-3(3), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3135/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 November 2024AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that while the claimed source was not proven, family savings could not be ruled out. Therefore, a lumpsum addition of Rs. 4 lakhs was deemed just and proper.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned unexplained cash credits in savings bank accounts. The assessee claimed the source was advances for land sales that did not materialize.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the genuineness of cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts and the adequacy of explanations provided for their source.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 06.11.2024Pronounced: 29.11.2024

Date of hearing 06.11.2024 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2024 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)-NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064429554(1), dated 29.04.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceeded ex-parte against him.

3.

Learned Departmental Representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing that both the lower appellate authorities herein have rightly made the impugned section 68 unexplained cash credits addition representing the taxpayer’s cash deposits in saving bank accounts.

4.

Mr. Yogesh Sharma, Sr. DR’s case accordingly is that this tribunal ought to confirm the impugned addition since the assessee has all along failed to explain the source of his cash deposits herein. 5. A perusal of the instant case file reveals that the assessee had attributed the source of the impugned cash deposits to the advances received from Sh. Abid and Sh. Alok on 17th and 10th June, 2008 amounting to Rs.6 lakhs and 4 lakhs, respectively in lieu of transferring his lands, whose sale deeds never materialised. The fact, however, remains that even if the said source is rejected, accumulation of family savings etc. could not be per se ruled out keeping in kind the taxpayers’ socio-economic status. I, therefore, deem it appropriate that a lumpsum addition of Rs.4 lakhs only

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →