CHAMPAKALI,GHAZIABAD V. ITOWARD-2(1)(2),GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

ITA 4180/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Champakali, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which upheld the addition of Rs. 36.08 lakhs as unexplained cash deposits under section 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that these deposits were sourced from her deceased husband's bank withdrawals, evidenced by his bank statements. The Revenue contended that the assessee failed to adequately explain the source of the deposits. The tribunal, after considering the arguments and evidence, decided to reduce the addition to Rs. 2 lakhs, finding partial merit in the assessee's arguments but noting the lack of complete reconciliation or cash flow statements.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 475381 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NITIN GULATI
• Section: 147; 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4180/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Champakali, 30 Bhoodgarhi, Dasna, Ghazibad Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Ghaziabad PAN :BBSPC9685F (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056543340(1), dated 26.09.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have added the assessee’s cash deposits made in the relevant financial year 2011-12 amounting to Rs.36.08 lakhs Assessee by Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv. Department by Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 21.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 21.01.2025 ITA No. 4180/Del/2024 2 | P a g e as unexplained under section 69 of the Act; in the course of assessment framed on 28th November, 2019 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. 4. Learned counsel’s sole substantive arguments is based on the assessee’s husbands bank statement evidencing withdrawals of Rs.39 lakhs between 1st February, 2012 to 22nd March, 2012, which are stated to be the source of the cash deposits in question amounting to Rs.36.08 lakhs. She is further stated to be a widow having no other source of income since living in a remote rural area. 5. The Revenue vehemently argues in support of the impugned addition that the same has been rightly made in the assessee’s hands as she could not explain the source of her cash deposits. 6. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and Revenue’s foregoing vehement rival contentions and find no reason to express my consent to either party’s stand in entirety. This is for the precise reason that although the assessee has been able to prima facie indicate her cash deposits as forming subject matter of her deceased’s husband withdrawals, neither she has filed the corresponding reconciliation nor cash flow statement so as to satisfactorily discharge the onus cast on her. ITA No. 4180/Del/2024 3 | P a g e 7. The Revenue’s contention is that the impugned cash deposits be entirely added in the assessee’s hands also does not deserves to be accepted as she has almost explained the source of her husband’s cash withdrawals as forming subject matter of cash deposit. 8. Be that as it may, the tribunal is of the considered view in this peculiar factual backdrop that a lumsum addition of Rs. 2 lakhs only would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets the relief of Rs.34.06 lakhs in other words. Same order to follow regarding the assessee’s interest component as well. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. 9. Learned counsel fairly submits that the assessee does not wish to press for her interest addition as the same relates to the actual cash deposits as well. Ordered accordingly. 10. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 21st January, 2025 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 21st January, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant ITA No. 4180/Del/2024 4 | P a g e 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "