DEVEN CHAUDHRY,MATHURA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(3)(1), MATHURA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee's explanation for the source of cash deposits was consistent and supported by evidence of prior surrender. It also noted that Section 115BBE is applicable prospectively.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited a large sum of cash during the demonetization period, claiming it was from income surrendered in a survey in AY 2014-15. The Assessing Officer and CIT(Appeals) found this explanation unacceptable and made additions to income.
What were the issues?
Whether the cash deposits made during demonetization were sufficiently explained by prior income surrender, and whether Section 115BBE could be invoked.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(6)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Kishanchand Chellaram v. CIT962 citing125 ITR 713 · 1980 · SC
- Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram v. CIT570 citing37 ITR 288 · 1959 · SC
- CIT v. Daulat Ram Rawatmull525 citing87 ITR 349 · 1973 · SC · Read judgment
- Sreelekha Banerjee v. CIT281 citing49 ITR 112 · 1963 · SC
- S.R. Venkata Ratnam v. CIT53 citing127 ITR 807 · 1981 · HC
- Jaharlal Das v. State of Orissa5 citing3 SCC 27 · 1991
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
PER : S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Both these appeals have been filed by two different assessees against separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 08.11.2024 and 05.03.2025 respectively, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Since common facts and issue are involved in both these appeals, though filed by two different assessees, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. We take u
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.
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
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
