INCOME TAX OFFICER , HAPUR V. MANOJ KUMAR SINGHAL, HAPUR

ITA 206/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which had reversed the Assessing Officer's addition of Rs. 1,84,94,100 as unexplained cash credits in the assessee's account for the assessment year 2014-15. The addition was initially made based on reports of high-risk financial transactions and suspicious transaction reports. However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee provided substantial evidence including cash flow statements, profit and loss accounts, and bank statements, which the CIT(A) accepted as valid explanations for the credits. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and evidence, agreed with the CIT(A)'s findings and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26142 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KATOCH
• Assessee Lawyers: PRIYANSH JAIN
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 68; 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.206/Del/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur, Uttar Pradesh Vs. Sh. Manoj Kumar Singhal, 226, Pacca Bagh, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh PAN:ALOPS786OF (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, 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/250/2023-24/1057602443(1), dated 01.11.2023 involving proceedings under sections 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Assessee by Sh. Priyansh Jain, CA Department by Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of hearing 26.03.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.03.2025 ITA No.206/Del/2024 2 | P a g e 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. The Revenue’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal seeks to revive the Assessing Officer’s action adding an amount of Rs. 1,84,94,100/- in assessee’s hands as unexplained cash credits; in course of assessment framed on 19th of March, 2022 and reversed in CIT(A)’s order as under: “6.1. 1st ground of appeal, i.e. that the AO has erred on fact and in law, in making addition of Rs. 1,84,94,100/- on account of unexplained credits under section 69A on arbitrary bass without taking the cognizance of facts and records which is against the Law and the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. I have perused the facts of the case and also the observations of the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. The AO passed order u/s 147 of the Act making an addition of Rs. 1,84,94,100/- u/s 69A on the basis information available with department from High Risk Financial transaction report in Insight Portal of Income Tax Department and through STR report received from the Deputy Director of Income Tax(Inv), Unit-III, Ghaziabad. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant submitted written submissions along with cash flow statements and profit and loss accounts, copy of bank statements wherein the appellant claimed that he made a total transaction of Rs. 1,86,81,800/- i.e. Rs. 90,94,000/- credit in HDFC Bank A/c no. 06721000001723, Rs. 94,00,000/- credit in PNB A/c No. 187000100092787 and Rs. 1,87,800/- received from OBC loan account no. 15085015000871 in spite of total Rs. 1,84,94,100/- during the assessment year. The source of total amount of Rs. 1,86,81,800/- is as under: ITA No.206/Del/2024 3 | P a g e In view of the above, total credit submissions of Rs. 1,86,81,800/- is out of valid sources i.e. from associate concerns, wife and friends & relatives. All inwards are quite verified from copy of ITR and bank statements/transactions statement and cash flow statements provided by the appellant. Thus, credit submissions were properly explained by the appellant during appellant proceedings. Accordingly, the addition of Rs. 1, 84,94,100/- u/s 69A made by the AO in the assessment order is deleted and the 1st ground of appeal is allowed. 6.2. 2nd ground of appeal, i.e. other grounds will be submitted at the time of hearings, as during the appeal proceedings no other ground was submitted by the appellant hence the 2nd ground of appeal is dismissed.” 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the Revenue’s and the assessee’s respective vehement submissions against and in support of the CIT(A)’s foregoing detailed discussion deleting the impugned section 68 unexplained cash credit addition. It has already come on record as per the foregoing tabulation that the ITA No.206/Del/2024 4 | P a g e assessee had received the sum(s) in question from related parties, who duly explained their respective sources. That being the case, we conclude that the Revenue’s instant sole substantive ground has no merit, be it on a legality of merits, as the case may be. Rejected accordingly. 5. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26th March, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "