SANDEEP KUMAR,JHAJJAR vs. ITO,WARD-4, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3765/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 December 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restricted the impugned addition to a lump sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, noting that neither the assessee provided a cash flow statement nor the department identified a specific defect. This decision granted the assessee a relief of Rs. 5,00,000/-, with the condition that this estimation would not set a precedent.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- made under sections 68/69A for cash deposits during the demonetization period for Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee contended that they had cash in hand of Rs. 4,58,728/- and had made bank withdrawals of Rs. 2,00,000/- in the previous year.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the correctness of the addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- made under sections 68/69A of the Income-tax Act for cash deposits during the demonetization period, considering the assessee's claimed cash in hand and bank withdrawals.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 69A,Section 143(3)

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 Naman Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.12.2024Pronounced: 16.12.2024

O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arises against National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi’s DIN and Order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1046474104(1) dated 26.10.2022, in case no. CIT(A), Rohtak/11145/2019-20 in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

Coming directly to the sole dispute between the parties regarding correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ action making section 68/69A addition of Rs. 6,00,000/- representing cash deposits made during demonetization, it prima facie, emerges from the case file that he had cash in hand of Rs. 4,58,728/- and bank withdrawals in the relevant previous year figured at Rs. 2,00,000/-, respectively.

3.

This being the clinching case emerging from the appeal file, it is deemed appropriate in larger interest of justice to restrict the impugned addition to a lump sum amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- only as neither the assessee has been able to file corresponding cash flow statement nor the department could point out any specific defect, with a rider that the instant estimation shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs. five lakhs in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in open court on 16.12.2024.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →