DHARMENDRASINH RANJIT CHAVDA,BARDOLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-01, BARDOLI, SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1334/SRT/2024Status: HeardITAT Surat23 January 2026AY 2017-18Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Vice President), MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer did not sustain. The assessee had provided sufficient evidence to explain the cash deposits, including prior withdrawals and other financial transactions.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 12,90,000/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act related to cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee provided bank statements, cash flow statements, bank withdrawal certificates, confirmation letters, and details of Kisan Credit Card loan repayments to explain the source of the deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made under section 68 for cash deposits during demonetization is sustainable when the assessee provides documentary evidence to explain the source of funds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Ms. Himali Mistry, C.A
For Respondent: Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 23.01.2026

O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 20-01-2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2017-18.

Delay condoned.

2.

The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 12,90,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act related to cash deposits during demonetization period. The assessee has given the bank statement before the A.O. as well as before the CIT(A) explaining details of cash withdrawals prior to demonetisation along with the cash deposits from time to time. Before us, the assessee also gave the cash flow statement of the said withdrawals and cash deposits alongwith Dharmendrasinh Ranjit Chavda Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– bank statement. Before us, the assessee submitted the cash withdrawal certificate issued by Bank of India as well as confirmation letters from his brothers. The assessee also gave the details of Kisan Credit Card (KCC) loan repayment for which the assessee made cash deposits prior to demonetization as well. Therefore, we hold that the addition does not sustain.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 23.01.2026

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →