PARAG SURESH VAKHARIA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of ₹1.40 lakh without cogent reasons, especially considering the assessee's cash-driven business. The Tribunal directed the deletion of this amount.
What were the facts?
During a search, cash of ₹8,97,700 was found at the assessee's residence. The assessee claimed portions belonged to his used car business, a private limited company, and family members. The Assessing Officer added ₹7 lakh as unexplained money.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of ₹1.40 lakh as unexplained money was justified, and if the CIT(A) erred in confirming it without proper reasoning.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 22/12/2022, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2020–21.
In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“1. Whether under law and facts the Ld. AO is correct in passing the order, dated 29.09.2021. 2. Whether under law and facts the Ld. AO is justified in adding back Rs. 1,40,000/- as Unexplained Money under Sec 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The order passed by the Ld. AO is wrong, incorrect, illegal and void and without principle of natural justice.
2 Parag Suresh Vakharia ITA no.57/Nag./2023
4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify and withdraw any grounds before or during the course of the appellate proceedings.”
During the course of hearing, when the case was called for, neither the assessee nor any of its authorised representative appeared before us to assist the Bench in disposing of the appeal filed by the assessee. However, we proceed to dispose of this appeal ex–parte qua the assessee appellant and after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of material available on record.
The only issue involved in this appeal relates to the addition of ` 1,40,000, on account of unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").
Facts in Brief:– The assessee is engaged in the business of sale and purchase of used cars filed its return of income on 31/03/2021, disclosing total income at ` 3,08,600. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was conducted in assessee’s case in connection with M/s. Swami Fuels Pvt. Ltd. During the course of search proceedings, a sum of ` 8,97,700, in cash was found at the residence of the assessee. The assessee stated in his statement recorded under section 132(4) of the Act that ` 2,15.000, belongs to used car business and ` 5,60,000, belongs to Swami Fuels Pvt. Ltd., and the remaining amount of ` 1,22,900, belongs to assessee’s family members. The assessee submitted that the assessee is into cash driven business of sale and purchase of used cars. Though, in this business, the assessee generated cash of ` 2.15 lakh and tax has also been paid. The assessee submitted that there are five members in his family from their accumulated savings and 3 Parag Suresh Vakharia ITA no.57/Nag./2023 withdrawals of the family members which was handed by the Late Shri Suresh Vakharia. The Assessing Officer considering the submissions of the assessee rejected the same and the addition was made for ` 7 lakh, by treating it as unexplained money under section 69 of the Act which was added to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority.
The learned CIT(A) deleted the addition of ` 5,60,000, while accepting it to be belongs to Swami Fuels Pvt. Ltd., as the assessee has produced acceptance letter from the said company. However, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition of ` 1.40 lakh, as the assessee could not provide any reasoning for the same.
The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order passed by the learned CIT(A).
Having heard the submissions of the learned Departmental Representative, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below, we find that once the learned CIT(A) has accepted the amount of ` 5.60 lakh and the remaining amount of ` 1.40 lakh was confirmed without there being any cogent reason. We further find that nether the learned CIT(A) nor the Assessing Officer has denied the explanation of the assessee that he is into the business of sale and purchase of used cars and, therefore, generally cash would have been generated. Under these circumstances of the case, in our considered opinion, the learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the remaining amount of ` 1.40 lakh.
4 Parag Suresh Vakharia ITA no.57/Nag./2023 Consequently, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the remaining amount of ` 1.40 lakh, and recomputed the income of the assessee accordingly. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18/09/2024
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 →- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026