SANJIV KUMAR AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(4)AGRA, AGRA
Facts
The assessee filed an income tax return which was selected for scrutiny due to cash deposits during demonetization. The Assessing Officer made a best judgment assessment, adding Rs. 52,50,000/- as unexplained cash deposits. The assessee's first appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee claimed the deposits were from farmers for cold storage receipts. However, the assessee failed to provide sufficient details and confirmations to the lower authorities. The Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification of evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash deposits is justified, and whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the evidence presented by the assessee.
Sections Cited
144, 69A, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 162/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18
Sanjeev Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Paramsukh, Etmadpur (UP). Ward 2(1)(4), Agra. PAN : ABGPA3326E (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Ms. Prarthana Jalan, C.A. Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 19.08.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.08.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 04.02.2025 passed in Appeal No. CIT(Appeal) 2, Agra/10761/2019-20 by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-10, Mumbai u/s. 250 of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts state that the assessee filed return of income on 27.03.2018,
declaring total income of Rs.12,01,106/-, which was revised on 18.07.2018 on the same income. Case was selected for scrutiny under CASS due to cash deposit during the demonetization period. The assessee did not
ITA No.162/Agr/2025
respond to the statutory notices, hence, the ld. Assessing Officer made best
judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act and made addition of
Rs.52,50,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposits u/s. 69A of the Act.
Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who,
after considering assessee’s submissions, dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
Appellant assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground, in
addition to others, that the impugned order is bad in law as has been passed
by ignoring the deposit in the assessee’s bank account, which was made
mostly out of the receipts from the farmers, who used the facility of
appellant’s cold storage.
Perused the records and heard learned representative for the
assessee and learned DR for the revenue.
Learned AR has drawn the attention of the Bench towards paper book,
wherein a list of affidavits of farmers along with Aadhaar copies has been
filed at page 1 to 56 in support of said deposits.
Learned DR, on the other hand, supported the impugned order.
We notice that learned Assessing Officer has made the best judgment
assessment u/s. 144 of the Act and added Rs.52,50,000/- as unexplained
cash deposited during the demonetization period. It further transpires from
the perusal of the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) that after
considering the submissions of the appellant assessee, the first appellate 2 | P a g e
ITA No.162/Agr/2025
authority has dismissed assessee’s appeal on the ground that the appellant
did neither furnish the dates of details of cash received nor any confirmation
from the concerned parties. In the totality of facts and circumstances and in
the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to restore the matter back
to the file of learned Assessing Officer, before whom, the assessee may file
submissions afresh along with evidences with respect to the details of cash
receipts and confirmation of such receipts from the concerned parties to
substantiate the impugned cash deposit. Learned Assessing Officer, after
due verification of the evidence produced before him, shall pass order afresh
in accordance with law. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall
ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is
liable to be allowed accordingly.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.08.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
3 | P a g e
