AVIKAL MASKARA,KANKE ROAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), RANCHI

PDF

ITA 253/RAN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 October 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)3 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee, a partner in Mahabir Marketing Solutions and a Director in M/s Eon Sales Enterprises Private Limited, had Rs. 23,51,700/- deposited in a Bank of Baroda account. Although this account was linked to the assessee's PAN, the assessee contended it belonged to M/s Eon Sales Enterprises Private Limited due to a bank error. The Assessing Officer treated the cash deposit as unexplained income of the assessee.

Held

The Tribunal noted that the AO himself acknowledged the bank account belonged to M/s Eon Sales Enterprises Private Limited, despite its connection to the assessee's PAN. Since crucial issues like the correct ownership of the account, proof of the bank's error, and the company's financial records were not adequately examined, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to verify if the company's balance sheet and cash book reflect the deposit and if the company had sufficient cash.

Key Issues

Whether a cash deposit in a bank account linked to the assessee's PAN, but claimed to belong to a company where the assessee is a director, constitutes unexplained income of the individual assessee; and the proper procedure for verifying the true ownership of a bank account and the source of deposits when a PAN linkage discrepancy arises.

Sections Cited

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 Rajiv Mittal, A.R

For Respondent: Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr.DR

Hearing: 06/10/2025Pronounced: 06/10/2025

Assessee represented by Shri Rajiv Mittal, A.R. Department represented by Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 06/10/2025 Date of pronouncement 06/10/2025 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. CIT(A), Ranchi/10627/2019-20 dated 26/03/2024 for the A.Y. 2017-18.

Shri Rajiv Mittal represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Khub Chand Pandya, ld. Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that during the impugned assessment year, the assessee is a partner in Mahabir Marketing Solutions. The assessee is also a Director in M/s Eon Sales Enterprises Private Limited. It was the submission that in the bank account belonging to M/s Eon Sales Enterprises Private Limited, cash had been deposited to an extent of Rs. 23,51,700/- in the Bank of Baroda Account No. 17020000718. It was a submission that the PAN number attached to the said bank account of the said company, however, was that of the Avikal Maskara Vs ITO assessee. It was a submission that as the said cash had been deposited in the bank account of the company and the same showed up in the PAN details of the assessee, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposit as an unexplained income of the assessee. It was a submission that he had no objection if the issue was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify whether the bank account belonged to the company.

In reply, the ld. Sr.DR submitted that the assessee has not produced any evidence to show that PAN number of the assessee was wrongly attached to the said bank account.