NIDHI VERMA,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, YAMUNA NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 77/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 December 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the deposit amount to be small and considered it reasonable for a divorced lady living with her parents to receive cash gifts from them. The Tribunal also noted that the father had died and small cash at home was likely deposited during demonetization.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a divorced lady, deposited Rs. 12.74 lacs in her bank account during the demonetization period. She claimed the source was past savings, cash gifts from her parents for subsistence, and tuition work income.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposit made by the assessee during demonetization was unexplained, and if the explanation provided by the assessee was satisfactory.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

(PHYSICAL HEARING) �नधा�रतीक�ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri. Ajay Jain, C.A. राज�वक�ओरसे/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. D.R. सुनवाईक�तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 13.11.2024 उदघोषणाक�तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2024 आदेश/Order The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 17.01.2024 for the Assessment Year: 2017-18. The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Nidhi Verma v. ITO 2 Rs.12.74 lacs made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee.

2.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is a divorced lady and she was living with her mother and that her father has already died. That the assessee had deposited aforesaid amount in her bank account, which was lying in cash with the assessee, during the demonetization period. That the source of the aforesaid amount was out of the past savings and the cash received from her parents given by them for the subsistence and survival of the assessee. Apart from that, she was also doing tuition work from which her savings were collected.

3.

After hearing the rival submissions of the ld. Representatives of the parties and going through the record, I find that amount of deposit is very small and it is not uncommon that a divorced lady, living with her parents would get some gifts in cash from parents as they would be worried about the future of their daughter. The father of the assessee had already died and it is quite reasonable that there would be small cash lying at her home which was required to be deposited during the demonetization period.

Nidhi Verma v. ITO 3 4. Considering the aforesaid factual aspects, I do not find any justification on the part of the lower authorities, the same is accordingly, ordered to be deleted.

5.

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

Order pronounced on 09.12.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →