Manoj Aggarwal v. DCIT

113 ITD 377Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#1170 most cited

What is Manoj Aggarwal v. DCIT authority for?

The assessee must explain the nature and source of any sum credited in their accounts, including bank statements, and mere book entries or banking channels without financial capacity are insufficient to prove genuineness under Section 68. The case also holds that wrong quoting of a section is not fatal to proceedings, emphasizing substance over form.

97

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Manoj Aggarwal v. DCIT · Section 68 · Section 69A · cash credits · unexplained money · assessee's onus of proof · genuineness of transactions · bank statements as books · wrong section quoted not fatal · substance over form · financial capacity · Special Bench ITAT

Sections most often in play

Section 68Section 143(3)Section 69ASection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 115BBE

Issues it is cited on

section 110peak credit theorysurvey under section 133atrade creditorspanchnamasection 250(4)on-moneysection 271aloose paperssection 131(1a)reopening of assessmentaddition u/s 68

Judgments citing Manoj Aggarwal v. DCIT

Smt. Sanjukta Prusty, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/CTK/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Niranjan Panda, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 250

…CIT (A) by citing the unexplained following judicial pronouncements investment. rejected the contention of the appellant with respect to "Unexplained credit in bank can not be taxed as unexplained investment U/S-69" A) Manoj Agarwal Vs. DCIT, New Delhi.(2008) 113 ITD 377 (Delhi BencfV'A") (Special Bench). B) Smt Ranu Agarwal Vs. ITO, 3(3). (2012) 22 Taxman.com 94 (Agra)Third Member). The copy of the assessment order is enclosed in the paper book-1 submitted on 08.01.2018 & marked as Annexure- A (Page- 1 to 13) for your honour's kind perusal. 4. That being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT(A) this appeal is p…

Shri Anil Kothari (HUF), Surat vs. The Dy.CIT, Circle- 6, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2645/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 Oct 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amrjit Singh & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं".I.T.A No.2048/Ahd/2010 & 2645/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"Assessment Year:2007-08 1. Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम 1. Sri Anil J Kothari Proprietor Of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Surat. M/S. Arpit Exports, G-01, Vs. Vithrag Chambers, 7/1407 Thoba Sheri, Surat. 2. Sri Anil J Kothari Proprietor Of 2. Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Arpit Exports, G-01, Income-Tax, Circle -6, Surat. Vithrag Chambers, 7/1407 Thoba Sheri, Surat. "था. ले. सं./Pan No.: Aacha 4940 H अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, C.A. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mayank Pandey, Sr. D.R.

For Respondent: 2. Ground No.1 as amended by the Revenue states that Ld. CIT (A) has erred in de
Section 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

…ITO Ward 1(1) Surat [I.T.A.No. 2400 & 2407/Ahd/ dated 10.05.2013 of Ahmedabad tribunal, wherein net profit was estimated at 0.5% of turnover. The learned counsel for the assessee Further, submitted the Special Bench in the case of Manoj Agarwal v. DCIT [2008] 113 ITD 377 (Del) has estimated commission income at 0.50% for giving accommodation entries by holding the CIT (A) was justified in estimating net commission at 0.355 after allowing 0.15% for expenses. The learned counsel for the assessee. Therefore, it was submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. The ld.Counsel further, relied…

Shri Dhaval Ramehschandra Shah, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 121/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad&Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 121/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dhaval Rameshchandra Ito बनाम/ Ward-5(1)(3), Shah Vs. 6Th Floor, Nature View 8-A Regency Park, Building, Nr. Hk House, Nr. Mithakhali Gam, Ashram Road, Mithakhali, Ahmedabad- 380009 Ahmedabad- 380006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Anj Ps4 371 G .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T. Sankar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: 08/07/2019
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ternative judicial cases i.e. 100 taxmann.com 325 that any sum found credited in bank pass book statement cannot be treated as an unexplained cash credit. The Ld. DR has referred the decision of Special Bench of Delhi ITAT in the case of Manoj Agarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Delhi)(SB) wherein it is held that non-maintenance of books of account is not a material factor and wrong mentioning of section is not fatal. We have also considered the case of Arunkumar J. Machhala vs. CIT of Hon’ble Bombay High Court wherein the addition u/s. 68 was sustained after rejecting the contention of the assessee that he had not main…

Ravindra Prataprai Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 29(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 19/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood (Jm)

Section 131Section 133Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 69

…axable under section 68 of the IT Act, however, in case no books of accounts are maintained by the appellant, the amount is taxable under section 69/69B of the IT Act as held by the Special Bench of ITAT, New Delhi in the case of Manoj Aggarwal Vs DCIT [2008] 113 ITD 377 (DELHF) (SB). Accordingly, the first ground of appeal is dismissed and addition of Rs. 53,29,3567- made by the AO is confirmed. 6. For A.Y. 2010-11, for unexplained cash deposit the Assessing Officer has also noted that assessee in statement u/s. 133A has accepted to be his undisclosed income. 7. Against these orders assessee is in appeal befor…

Ravindra Prataprai Doshi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 29(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 53/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Soodravindra Prataprai Doshi The Income Tax Officer, Room No. 6, A Wing, Ward 29(3)(1), Premrose, Chs, 305, C-10, Dadasaheb Gaikwad Road, Vs. Pratyaksh Kar Bhavan, Tambe Nagar, Mulund (E) Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai- 400080 Bandra (East), Mumbai -400051 Pan – Aaspd6694B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.G.Pansari, Sr. D.R
Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…no books of accounts were maintained by the assessee, then the aforesaid amount of cash deposits would be taxable under Sec.69/69B of the Act in conformity with the view taken by the „Special Bench‟ of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Manoj Aggarwal Vs. DCIT (2018) 113 ITD 377 (Del) (SB). On the basis of his aforesaid deliberations the CIT(A) upheld the addition of P a g e | 4 ITA No. 53/Mum/2018 AY. 2011-12 Ravindra Prataprai Doshi Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 29(3)(1) Rs.2,46,88,510/- and dismissed the appeal. Apart there from, it was observed by the CIT(A) that as the assessee had failed to place on record any m…

Abdullah Siddique, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Saharanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2112/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69

…ting Rs.3,25,000/- from total deposited the balance amount of Rs.3201150/- remains unexplained case deposits as the onus lies on the assessed to prove the capacity and genuineness of the transaction. Reliance is placed on Manoj Aggarwal VS DCIT (ITAT, SB Del) 113 ITD 377 and VIT VS K. Chinnathamban (S.C.) 292 ITR 682.” 6. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A) who considering the facts, submissions and the evidences granted part relief holding as under: ”7. The facts of the case, submission of the appellant and remand report of the AO have been gone through. In this case the appellant has file…

Abdullah Siddique, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Saharanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2111/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69

…ting Rs.3,25,000/- from total deposited the balance amount of Rs.3201150/- remains unexplained case deposits as the onus lies on the assessed to prove the capacity and genuineness of the transaction. Reliance is placed on Manoj Aggarwal VS DCIT (ITAT, SB Del) 113 ITD 377 and VIT VS K. Chinnathamban (S.C.) 292 ITR 682.” 6. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A) who considering the facts, submissions and the evidences granted part relief holding as under: ”7. The facts of the case, submission of the appellant and remand report of the AO have been gone through. In this case the appellant has file…

Abdullah Siddique, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward-1, Saharanpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2107/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 69

…ting Rs.3,25,000/- from total deposited the balance amount of Rs.3201150/- remains unexplained case deposits as the onus lies on the assessed to prove the capacity and genuineness of the transaction. Reliance is placed on Manoj Aggarwal VS DCIT (ITAT, SB Del) 113 ITD 377 and VIT VS K. Chinnathamban (S.C.) 292 ITR 682.” 6. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A) who considering the facts, submissions and the evidences granted part relief holding as under: ”7. The facts of the case, submission of the appellant and remand report of the AO have been gone through. In this case the appellant has file…

M/S Abhijeet Enterprise Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(2), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 308/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 68

…1 Abhijeet Enterprise Ltd. , AY 2013-14 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 308/Kol/2017 Assessment Years: 2013-14 M/s. Abhijeet Enterprise Ltd. Vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd-2(2), Kolkata (PAN: AAJCA4713C) Appellant Respondent For the Appellant Shri M. D. Shah, AR For the Respondent Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT, DR Date of Hearing 08.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement 27.03.2019 ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This appeal of t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1754/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1753/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1752/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1629/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1628/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

Sh. Himanshu Verma, Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue and Assessee are dismissed

ITA 1627/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…al in hand or on the basis of any comparable case having identical facts. 13.1.3 The AR of the appellant also relied on the ratio of the following judicial decisions where commission income was determined on similar facts of the case: a) Manoj Aggarwal (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) b) Sh. S. K. Gupta u/s 245D(4) of the I T Act, 1961 by the Hon'ble Settlement Commission. c) Sanjay Kumar Garg Vs ACIT (2011) 12 Taxman.com 294 (Delhi) d) Sanjay Rastogi Vs ACIT ITA No. 164 to 168/De1/2010. In all the above cases only commission income net of expenses have been assessed. The AR of the appellant also tabulated the estimated…

M/S. Frolic Realty Private Limited, Indore vs. The ITO 3(3), Indore

In the result, these three appeals of by different assessees in ITANo

ITA 364/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble I Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Avocado Trading Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company, Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4206K Assessment Year: 2010-11 Aspirant Mercantile Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company,Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4207J

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ase cannot be a treated as unexplained cash credit unexplained cash credit – CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) 156 Taxman 507 (All); Annamaria Travels & Tours (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2005) 95 TTJ 71 (Del); Manoj Agarwal v. DCIT (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) (SB) Even otherwise, if purchase is considered as non-genuine, genuine, it would be disallowed u/s.69C or trading results would be rejected and profits estimated or unexplained capital investment for making such purchases added u/s.69, hence, in any eventuality, sec.68 may not be applicable. • It is submitted that the addition is made witho…

M/S. Aspirant Mercantile Company Private Limited, Indore vs. The ITO 3(3), Indore

In the result, these three appeals of by different assessees in ITANo

ITA 363/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble I Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Avocado Trading Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company, Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4206K Assessment Year: 2010-11 Aspirant Mercantile Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company,Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4207J

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ase cannot be a treated as unexplained cash credit unexplained cash credit – CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) 156 Taxman 507 (All); Annamaria Travels & Tours (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2005) 95 TTJ 71 (Del); Manoj Agarwal v. DCIT (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) (SB) Even otherwise, if purchase is considered as non-genuine, genuine, it would be disallowed u/s.69C or trading results would be rejected and profits estimated or unexplained capital investment for making such purchases added u/s.69, hence, in any eventuality, sec.68 may not be applicable. • It is submitted that the addition is made witho…

M/S. Avocado Trading Company Private Limited, Indore vs. The ITO 3(3), Indore

In the result, these three appeals of by different assessees in ITANo

ITA 362/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon'Ble I Kul Bharat & Hon'Ble Manish Boradassessment Year: 2010-11 Avocado Trading Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company, Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4206K Assessment Year: 2010-11 Aspirant Mercantile Company Private Ito 3(3) Limited Indore बनाम/ G.J. Shah & Company,Chartered Vs. Accountants 404, Manas Bhawan, 11 Rnt Marg, Indore-452001 (Appellant) (Revenue) Pan: Aagca4207J

Section 143(3)Section 68

…ase cannot be a treated as unexplained cash credit unexplained cash credit – CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) CIT v. Pancham Dass Jain (2006) 156 Taxman 507 (All); Annamaria Travels & Tours (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2005) 95 TTJ 71 (Del); Manoj Agarwal v. DCIT (2008) 113 ITD 377 (Del) (SB) Even otherwise, if purchase is considered as non-genuine, genuine, it would be disallowed u/s.69C or trading results would be rejected and profits estimated or unexplained capital investment for making such purchases added u/s.69, hence, in any eventuality, sec.68 may not be applicable. • It is submitted that the addition is made witho…

Shri Dilip Kumar Nathany, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-43(3), Kolkata

ITA 1798/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S, Godaraassessment Year:2012-13

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S, Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year:2012-13 Shri Dilip Kumar Nathany, Income Tax Officer, बनाम / 12A,Madn Chaterjee Lane, Ward-43(3), Kolkata V/s. Kolkata [PAN No.ABGPN 1342 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shi K.M. Roy, AR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Baijuath Singh, Addl. CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 02-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 23-01-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income-ta…

Nitesh Doshi, Indore vs. JCIT Range-2, Indore

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 743/IND/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 68Section 69Section 69B

…68 is not applicable, the cash deposit in the bank can be asked to be explained by the assessee under section 69 or section 69B of the Act. In this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble I.T.A.T., Delhi in the case of Shri Manoj Agrawal vs. DCIT 113 ITD 377 (SB). 5. It was stated during the course of hearing that the deposits relate to personal account of the assessee and out of savings duly recorded in the cash book. Ld. counsel for the assessee has drawn my attention to paper book page 43. 6. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposes the submission and supported the orders of the authorities…