INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEW DELHI vs. SATISH KUMAR, NEW DELHI

ITA 2447/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 September 2025AY 2017-1833 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that if the existence of stock and cash sales are not doubted by the Assessing Officer, and the cash deposits are explained as proceeds from these sales, then no addition under Section 68 is warranted. The Tribunal followed various High Court and ITAT decisions supporting this view.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act concerning cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee, engaged in ghee and oil trading, deposited a significant amount of Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) after November 8, 2016. The Assessing Officer treated a substantial portion of these deposits as unexplained.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits made during the demonetization period, explained as proceeds from cash sales, can be added under Section 68 when the assessee's stock and sales are not disputed. Whether accepting SBNs after the specified date, even if restricted by RBI notifications, automatically makes the cash credit unexplained under the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI M BALAGANESH

PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi dated 26.03.2024 for the AY 2017-18 in deleting the addition made u/s 68 of the Act in respect of cash deposits made during demonetization period.

2.

Ld. DR made the following submissions: (i) The assessee is an individual engaged in the trading of ghee and oil under the proprietorship M/s Phool Chand Hari Kishan. He filed his return of income on 26.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.4,58,120/- for the assessment year 2017-18. (ii) The case

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 →