MEENA KUMARI SADH,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 54(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4723/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 August 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI 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 cash deposits likely originated from prior cash withdrawals and therefore could not be treated as unexplained. The addition was deleted, and the assessee's quantum appeal was allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals concerned cash deposits made during demonetization, which the lower authorities treated as unexplained. The assessee had made significant cash withdrawals prior to demonetization.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits made during demonetization can be treated as unexplained when the assessee had made substantial cash withdrawals prior to the demonetization period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 271AAC1

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Sarwar Raza, Adv. &, Shri Muhammad Zaid Adv
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 28.08.2025Pronounced: 28.08.2025

O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M: These assessee’s twin appeals & 4724/Del/2025 for A.Y. 2017-18 arise against CIT(A)/NFAC Delhi’s as many DIN & Order Nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076237982(1) dated 15.05.2025 & ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078709868(1), dated 21.07.2025 in proceedings u/s 147 and 271AAC1 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’, respectively.

Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. The assessee’s quantum appeal ITA 4723/Del/2025 is directed against both the learned lower authorities’ action treating her cash deposit during demonetization of Rs. 11.45 lakhs as unexplained; in assessment order dated 12.05.2023, and upheld in the lower appellate discussion.

& 4724/Del/2025 3. Faced with this situation, it is noticed from a perusal of the assessee’s bank statement that she, inter alia, had withdrawn amount of Rs. 5 lakh in cash on 10.10.2016; Rs. 3 lakhs on 14.10.2016; Rs. 3,20,000/- on 15.10.2016; Rs. 3.5 lakhs and Rs. 50,000/- on 17.10.2016; Rs. 5 lakhs on 24.10.2016; respectively before demonetization. Necessary inference which would therefore arise is that her impugned cash deposit during demonetization form part of the cash withdrawals which could not have been treated as unexplained in both the lower proceedings. The impugned addition is deleted therefore. The assessee succeeds in her quantum appeal in very terms.

Same order to follow in assessee’s penalty appeal being consequential in nature.

4.

These assessee’s twin appeals & 4724/Del/2025 are allowed in very terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in open court on 28.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →