GANGA SAGAR,E / SECTOR H LDA COLONY KANPUR ROAD LUCKNOW V. DDIT/ADIT(INT TAX)LKN, LUCKNOW

ITA 630/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Ganga Sagar, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which upheld the addition of Rs.1,20,000 to the assessee's income on account of unexplained cash deposit under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer had initially made this addition, which was partially contested by the assessee. The CIT(A) deleted a larger amount but sustained the addition of Rs.1,20,000. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not consider the Khatauni as sufficient proof of agricultural activity on the land owned, which was the source of the cash deposit. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately considered the additional documents that the assessee wished to submit and thus restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790442 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MAZHAR AKRAM
• Assessee Lawyers: PRIYANK SHUKLA
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.630/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.630/Lkw/2025 Assessment year:2015-16 Ganga Sagar E/Sector H LDA Colony, Kanpur Road Lucknow-226012 PAN:CXNPS0604N Vs. DDIT/ADIT (Int Tax) Lucknow. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.630/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against the impugned appellate order dated 29/04/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1075872443(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and passed assessment order on 25/05/2023 under section 147 read with section 144C(3) of the I.T. Act by making Appellant by Shri Priyank Shukla, C.A. Respondent by Shri Mazhar Akram, CIT (D.R.) Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.630/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 2 addition of Rs.5,68,000/- and Rs.1,20,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposit under section 69A of the I.T. Act. Aggrieved with the order dated 25/05/2023, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 29/04/2025 has deleted the addition of Rs.5,68,000/- and upheld the addition of Rs.1,20,000/-. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the sustenance of addition of Rs.1,20,000/-. 3. During the course of hearing, learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that while sustaining the addition of Rs.1,20,000/-, learned CIT(A) has not considered the Khatauni, submitted by the assessee, as the sufficient proof that the actual agriculture activity was performed on the land owned by the assessee. Learned A.R. for the assessee requested that if learned CIT(A) is not considering the Khatauni as sufficient proof for agricultural activity, the assessee may be provided opportunity to produce additional records such as Khasra and other documents to establish the proof that the land was actually cultivated and proceeds were deposited. Learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. 4. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. The learned CIT(A) has rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has submitted copy of Khatauni only reflecting the ownership of land in his name. However, learned CIT(A) has mentioned in his impugned appellate order that the assessee has neither submitted copy of Khasra to show that the field was actually cultivated nor did he furnish any receipt of sale of agriculture produce or expense vouchers relating to purchase of seeds, fertilizer, confirmation letter from purchaser of the agriculture produce, mandi receipts etc. In view of the aforesaid, the issue in dispute is restored back to the file of the learned Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.630/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2015-16 3 CIT(A) with the direction to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and after considering the documents such as Khasra and other records to be submitted by the assessee during appellate proceedings. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 03/12/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (NIKHIL CHOUDHARY) (SUBHASH MALGURIA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated:03/12/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Printed from counselvise.com "