CHANDAN BANSAL,PANCHKULA V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , DELHI

ITA 759/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Chandan Bansal, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issues in the appeal were the additions of Rs. 21 lacs and Rs. 6,78,092 made by the AO, which were confirmed by the CIT(A). The AO had reopened the assessment based on discrepancies between the assessee's declared income and the cash available for property purchases, leading to additions based on credit entries in the assessee's bank accounts. The assessee argued that these amounts included loans from his father and withdrawals from his wife, which were not unexplained credits. The Tribunal found that the additional evidence provided by the assessee was not considered by the AO and thus restored the matter for re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774416 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: VIKRANT KACKARIA
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit; Gift; Source of fund
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 759/CHD/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Chandan Bansal, House No. 988-B, Sector 21, Panchkula. Vs The ITO, Ward-3, Panchkula. èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AHIPB8217D अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vikrant Kackaria, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.09.2025 HYBRID HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 06.06.2024 passed for assessment year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has taken four grounds of appeal, however, his grievance revolves around two issues, namely, ld. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.759/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 2 CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the additions of Rs.21 lacs and Rs.6,78,092/-. 3. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that the assessment order dated 31.03.2022 has been passed ex-parte u/s 144B read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has filed his original return of income on 30.07.2013 declaring total income at Rs.3,82,220/-. The AO has reopened this assessment by issuance of a notice u/s 148 on 25.03.2021. The reason for this re-opening is certain mis-match in cash available with the assessee vis-à-vis the property purchased by him. The AO, thereafter, perused the accounts of the assessee from Punjab National Bank and State Bank of India. He found that certain credit entries are there and ultimately made addition of Rs.21 lacs on account of such credit entries. Similarly, he made an addition of Rs.6,78,092/-. 4. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that total addition of Rs.27,78,092/- has been made for the reason that assessee has made deposits in the bank account but failed to appreciate that he has taken loan of Rs.11 lacs and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.759/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 3 Rs.10 lacs from his father through Account Payee Cheques and these loans were returned by the assessee. Hence, there is no unexplained credit in the accounts of the assessee. Similarly, another sum of Rs.6,78,092/- represents the cash withdrawal by the wife of the assessee which has been given to him. The assessee sought permission to adduce additional evidence and produced copy of the statement from Central Bank of India. The assessee has also produced bank statement of M/s Ganpati Traders, M/s Hari Om Traders and Smt. Rakhi Bansal. All these bank statements are being sought to be produced for the reason that assessee could demonstrate source of funds came to his possession and how these funds have been returned back by him. 5. On due consideration of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that these documents have not been filed before the AO. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders and restore these issues to the file of the AO. The assessee will be at liberty to submit any of these documents before the AO. The ld. AO is directed to go through the bank statements and any other evidence submitted by the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.759/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 4 assessee before re-adjudicating the issues. He will provide a due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. If the amounts are being taken from the father and the wife, then it would be construed that assessee has sufficient source of funds because gift from close relative does not fall within the ambit of definition of Section 56(ii) of the Act as deemed gift. 6. With the above observation, both the orders are set aside and restored back to the file of Assessing Officer. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 01.09.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT “Poonam” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "