BIPINKUMAR MANSUKHBHAI DETROJA,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD 4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 217/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Bipinkumar Mansukhbhai Detroja against the order of the CIT(A), which upheld the addition of Rs.5,76,000 to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. This amount was alleged to be unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer had initially made this addition under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, citing lack of satisfactory explanation from the assessee regarding the source of these deposits. The CIT(A) affirmed this addition, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after reviewing the bank account and the financial affairs of the assessee, concluded that the addition was not justified and allowed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712943 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJENDRA SINGHAL
• Keywords: Source of fund
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.217/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bipinkumar Mansukhbhai Detroja, 420 C/o Ankita Tiles, Opp. Bindal Oil Mil,Gota Gam, Ahmedabad-382481. [PAN :AJGPD0402 Q] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rajendra Singhal, AR Respondent by: Shri BP Makwana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2024, passed by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A), Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as \"CIT(A)\" for short), u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\" for short) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The sole grievance raised by the assessee in this appeal is as under:- “The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts as also in law in upholding the addition u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act of Rs.5,76,000/- for unexplained cash deposits in bank account.” 3. In this case, the assessee is an individual who filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 29.03.2018, declaring total income of Rs.2,50,600/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS for the issue of “cash deposit during demonetization period”. Subsequently, the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 06.12.2019, assessing the total income at Rs.8,26,600/-, after making an addition of Rs.5,76,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act on account Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 217/Ahd/2025 Bipinkumar M Detroja Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– of unexplained money. The observation made by the Assessing Officer in this regard is as follows:- “10. The assessee has not furnished cogent, logical and justifiable explanation to the issues flagged vide notices issued time-to-time under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, the bank account and cash book also remained to be explained. Therefore, in view of the foregoing discussion, it has been established explicitly beyond any doubt that during the demonetization period, the assessee has deposited cash in its bank account amounting to Rs.5,76,000/- and the same remains unexplained. In the circumstances, this amount of Rs.5,76,000/- is held to be undisclosed income earned out of undisclosed sources. Also, the assessee has not put forth any evidence to prove sources of income or to rebut the above findings. As such, this amount of Rs.5,76,000/- is held to be the income out of undisclosed sources of the assessee for the year under consideration and accordingly taxed. Penalty proceeding under section 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is initiated separately on his point.” 4. Aggrieved by the above addition, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who affirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We find that the total cash deposits were to the tune of Rs.5,76,000/-. Assessee is in the business of mineral water in the name of AMI Beverages, the sales of which is in cash. The opening balance of the cash was Rs.690962/- as on 01.04.2015, Rs.691940/- as on 31.03.2016, Rs.344984/- as on 31.03.2017, and Rs.597584/- as on 31.03.2018. After going through the bank account and the affairs of the assessee, we hold that no addition u/s 69A is called for. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 31.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 31.07.2025 **btk Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 217/Ahd/2025 Bipinkumar M Detroja Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 23.07.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 30.07.2025 3. Other Member …30.07.2025…… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …30.07.2025…… 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement . …31.07.2025…… 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S …31.07.2025…… 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk .07.25 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "