UPENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2)(1), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4936/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)5 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 held that the assessee had duly explained the source of the impugned cash by attributing it to the company's cash in hand, as evidenced by the director's paper book showing a significant amount of cash on hand.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose from an order treating Rs. 6,00,000/- found in the assessee's locker as unexplained under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- found in the assessee's locker was unexplained and could be added under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: CA &
Hearing: 23.09.2025Pronounced: 23.09.2025

Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Upendra Kumar Sharma, Vs ACIT, C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Associates Circle-5(2)(1), L-7A(LGF), South Extension, Noida, Part-II, New Delhi-110049 Uttar Pradesh-201303 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AANPS4928G Assessee by: Sh. Rajkumar Gupta, CA & Sh. J. P. Sharma, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079142876(1) dated 31.07.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming to the sole substantive issue between the parties herein, it is noticed from the case record that both the learned lower authorities have treated an amount of Rs.6,00,000/- kept in the assessee’s locker as unexplained u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act.

Upendra Kumar Sharma 4. Learned departmental representative vehemently argues that the impugned addition has been rightly made in the assessee’s hands on account of his failure to explain source thereof all along.

5.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel has filed the assessee’s detailed paper book indicting him as one of the director in M/s Suryansh Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. having cash in hand of Rs.21,72,627/- as on 31.03.2017 which has gone un- rebutted from the Revenue side. That being the case, the tribunal hereby hodls that the assessee has duly explained the source of the impugned cash of Rs.6,00,000/- kept in locker as attributable to his company cash in hand. The impugned addition is directed to be deleted in very terms.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →