ASHOK CHANDRABHAN KHANDAVE,NASHIK vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), , NASHIK

ITA 856/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 June 2024AY 2017-18Bench: MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member), DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had fulfilled their onus of proving the source of cash deposits by submitting sale bills, land revenue records (7/12 extracts), and bank statements. The AO failed to discharge their burden of proof to disprove the genuineness of these documents or conduct necessary inquiries.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an agriculturist, deposited Rs. 10,06,000 in their bank account during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these deposits as unexplained income under Section 68, despite the assessee providing evidence of agricultural income and sale of produce. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits made during demonetization by an agriculturist, supported by documentary evidence, can be added as unexplained income under Section 68 when the AO fails to discharge their burden of proof.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE

Before: MS. ASTHA CHANDRA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Budruk – DR
Hearing: 24/06/2024Pronounced: 28/06/2024

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], u/sec.250 of the Act dated 23.02.2024.The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

“1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.9,06,000out of the total addition of Rs. 10,06,000 made by the A.O. towards alleged unexplained cash deposits in bank account during demonetization period without appreciating that the said cash deposits Ashok Chandrabhan Khandave [A]

were sourced out of agricultural income earned by the appellant and hence, the abo

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →