BABY CHATTERJEE,RANCHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 241/RAN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi16 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal. It held that ₹25,11,000/- of the total addition, which originated from bank transfers, could not be treated as undisclosed and was effectively deleted. For the remaining cash deposit of ₹53,50,000/-, the matter was remanded back to the AO to allow the assessee a fresh opportunity to explain the source of these cash deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case for AY 2017-18 was selected for limited scrutiny due to cash deposits. The Assessing Officer (AO) added ₹78,61,000/- under Section 69A for unexplained bank deposits after the assessee failed to comply with notices. The assessee, an advertising contractor, claimed the deposits were cash receipts from customers, but the CIT(A) upheld the addition due to lack of evidence, leading to this appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits and bank transfers in the assessee's bank account constitute unexplained money under Section 69A, and if the Assessing Officer was justified in making the addition without differentiating between sources and providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 142(1),Section 274,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 271AAC,Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR
Hearing: 17/11/2025Pronounced: 16/12/2025

PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, A.M.

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3, Patna [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 09/08/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

"

1.

For that Ld CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in a summary manner without rightly appreciating the facts and grounds of appeal.

2.

For that the case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny on the reason "cash deposited during the year." The AO was not justified in travelling b

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →