Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an educational institution, was found to have made unexplained cash deposits of Rs.56,79,506/- in its SBI bank account. The Assessing Officer made an addition of this amount under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act. The assessee failed to provide supporting documents like balance sheets and bank statements to prove the genuineness of the transaction.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer's addition and the CIT(A)'s dismissal were primarily due to the assessee's failure to submit relevant documentary evidence. Considering the facts and the assessee's request for another opportunity, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of unexplained cash deposits to the assessee's income was justified given the lack of documentary evidence provided by the assessee.
Sections Cited
12AA, 148, 69A, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH-PATNA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: January 08, 2026 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.08.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2015–16.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an educational institution and is engaged in the activity of running in engineering College and the assessee-society is registered under Section 12AA of the Act. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on the ground of certain transactions and cash deposits exceeding two lakhs done by the assessee with State Bank of India. The Assessing Officer held that the deposits made in the SBI was not disclosed and the same was held as unexplained money and the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.56,79,506/- u/s 69A of the Act.
Maulana Azad College of Engineering and Technology 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by holding that the assessee failed to file supporting documents such as balance sheets, profit & loss a/c, bank statements etc. to prove the genuineness of the transaction.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee has come in appeal before us. The ld. AR argued that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in the absence of relevant documents. The ld. AR stated that the assessee is now ready to submit relevant documents and prayed for one more opportunity by restoring the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration by affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing.
The ld. DR did not raise any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer.
After hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and perusing the orders of the lower authorities, it appears to us that the Assessing Officer made the said addition due to failure on the part of the assessee to submit relevant documents and also the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by confirming the order of the Assessing Officer only on the ground of non-submission of documentary evidence to substantiate the deposits in SBI bank of Rs.56,79,506/-. Considering the above facts and on the request of the assessee, in the interest of natural justice, we inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to adjudicate the matter afresh after affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee of hearing by examining the documentary evidences which will be submitted by the assessee during the remand proceeding. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings by submitting all evidences/documents to substantiate its claim. 2
Kolkata, the 8th January, 2026.