DINESH KUMAR,GURGAON V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), GURGAON

ITA 5503/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Dinesh Kumar against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which sustained the addition of Rs.38,60,000 to his income as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer following information from the Risk Management Strategy that the assessee had made substantial cash deposits and investments in immovable property during the assessment year 2015-16, without filing a return of income. The assessee contested the addition, providing explanations and evidence which were partially accepted by the Assessing Officer. However, the CIT(A) upheld the addition, leading to the present appeal. The Tribunal, after reviewing the evidence, found the assessee's explanation credible and allowed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829099 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Delhi
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ISHWAR; CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण धिल्ली पीठ “एस एम सी”, धिल्ली श्री धिकास अिस्थी, न्याधयक सिस्य IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.5503/धिल्ली/2025 (नि.व. 2015-16) ITA No.5503/DEL/2025 (A.Y.2015-16) Dinesh Kumar, V & PO Pathreri, Bhora Kalan, Gurgaon, Haryana 122413 PAN: DUHPK-7924-P ...... अपीलार्थी/Appellant बिाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Gurgaon, Haryana 122016 ..... प्रनिवादी/Respondent अपीलार्थी द्वारा/Appellant by : Shri Ishwar, Chartered Accountant प्रधििािीद्वारा/Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR सुिवाई की निथर्थ/ Date of hearing : 16/12/2025 घोषणा की निथर्थ/ Date of pronouncement : 14/01/2026 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 10.07.2025, for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessment in the present case was framed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide order dated 30.03.2024 making addition of Rs.38,60,000/- u/s. 69A r.w.s 115BE of the Act. Notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee consequent to information received through Risk Management Strategy (RMS) that during the relevant previous year the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.47,50,000/- in his bank account and had also made investment in immovable property amounting to Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.5503/Del/2025 (AY 2015-16) Rs.1,30,50,000/-. Since the assessee had not filed return of income for the year under consideration, proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act were initiated. The assessee filed return of income in response to notice u/s.148 and also furnished certain details. The assessee explained that the cash deposits were out of (i) earlier withdrawal of cash from bank amounting to Rs.8,90,000/-, (ii) cash loans from friends and relatives amounting to Rs.19,00,000/-, and (iii) sale of agricultural land. The Assessing Officer accepted the explanation to the extent of cash withdrawal of Rs.8,90,000/-. However, in respect of the remaining amount of Rs.38,60,000/-, the AO held that the assessee failed to substantiate source of cash deposits with documentary evidence. Accordingly, the unsubstantiated cash deposits were added as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), but remained unsuccessful. 3. Shri Ishwar, appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that cash deposits in the bank are from earlier withdrawals of cash and sale of agricultural land. To substantiate his argument, he refers to copy of registered sale deed at pages 10 to 16 paper book and bank statement at page 17 of paper book. In so far as cash deposits from earlier withdrawals he submitted that the AO accepted the same. He thus, prayed for deleting the addition of Rs.38,60,000/-. 4. Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee failed to discharge the onus cast upon him to explain the source of cash deposits with supporting evidence. 5. Submissions made by both sides heard, orders of the authorities below perused. The short issue in appeal is the addition of Rs.38,60,000/- sustained by the CIT(A). The AO during assessment proceedings had questioned cash deposits of Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.5503/Del/2025 (AY 2015-16) Rs.47,50,000/- in assessee’s bank account. The assessee explained source of cash deposits as earlier withdrawals from the bank Rs.8,90,000/-and from sale of agricultural land. The AO accepted assessee’s submissions qua cash deposits of Rs.8,90,000/- from earlier withdrawals only. To substantiate deposits of cash from sale of land, the assessee has placed on record copy of registered sale deed dated 05.01.2015 at pages 8 to 10 of the paper book and assessee’s bank statement at page 17 of the paper book. A perusal of sale deed shows that the assessee was co- owner of agricultural land admeasuring 56 kanal 96 marla. The assessee was having ¼ share in the said land. This land was sold for a total consideration of Rs.71,54,34,037/- the assessee has received his share in consideration partly by way of cheque for Rs.1,15,75,000/- and the balance in cash. A perusal of the bank statement shows that the assessee has deposited cash Rs.39,50,000/- on 05.01.2015 and Rs.7,50,000/- on 06.01.2015. The proximity of dates of cash deposits in the bank and sale of agricultural land substantiates the plea of assessee that cash deposits in the bank were from part of sale consideration received in cash. The source disclosed by the assessee for deposit of cash is plausible. Hence, the same is accepted. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 14th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER धिल्ली/Delhi, ददिांक/Dated 14/01/2026 NV/- Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.5503/Del/2025 (AY 2015-16) प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपििCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी/The Appellant , 2. प्रनिवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. ववभागीय प्रनिनिथि, आय.अपी.अथि., दिल्ली /DR, ITAT, धिल्ली 5. गार्ड फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "