INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), THANE., THANE V. AKSHAYA ASHOK GHOLE, THANE

ITA 3915/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which had favored the assessee, Akshaya Ashok Ghole, in the matter of unexplained cash deposits and investments in immovable properties for the assessment year 2021-22. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal without proper consideration of the evidences and contentions presented during the assessment proceedings. The assessee, supported by her cross objection, argued that all relevant documents had been duly submitted and considered by the lower authorities, and that the CIT(A) had rightly deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal, after examining the submissions and evidences, concurred with the CIT(A) and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31947 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KIRAN UNAVEKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: KEYUR HINDOCHA
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Unexplained investment
• Section: 143(3); 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 3915/MUM/2023 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1) 6th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Room No. 23, B wing, Wagle Indl. Estate, Road No. 16Z, Thane (W) Mumbai-400 604. Vs. Akshaya Ashok Ghole Room No. 303, B Wing, Shrikrishna Darshan, Behind Mayuresh Park Kharegaon Kalwa (West), Thane - 400605. PAN NO. AHBPG2064N Appellant Respondent CO No. 98/MUM/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Akshaya Ashok Ghole Room No. 303, B Wing, Shrikrishna Darshan, Behind Mayuresh Park Kharegaon Kalwa (West), Thane - 400605. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1) 6th Floor, Ashar I.T. Park, Room No. 23, B wing, Wagle Indl. Estate, Road No. 16Z, Thane (W) Mumbai-400 604. PAN NO. AHBPG2064N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Keyur Hindocha Revenue by : Shri Kiran Unavekar Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 07/02/2025 Date of pronouncement : 10/02/2025 ORDER PER OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 21.08.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. assessment year 2021-2 2. In the above cited appeal, the Revenue has taken the following grounds : “a. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish documentary evidences in respect of investment in im issue of cash deposits made during the year. b. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that the contentions made by the assess those which were made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. c. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on the basis of the s evidences, which were made for the first time during the appellate proceedings and were in the nature of additional evidences, without allowing the Assessing Officer to examine the additional evidences as per Rule 46A(3) of the L.T. Rules 1962. d. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter or alter any ground/grounds, which may be necessary. 3. The assessee has filed a cross objection and the basically supporting the CIT(A) order and her written submi the Ld. CIT(A). 4. As the issues are common, the appeal of department and cross objection of assessee are clubbed and a common order is passed there is delay of less than 1 month by both parties and after hearing the reasons National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. 22. In the above cited appeal, the Revenue has taken the following On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish documentary evidences in respect of investment in immovable properties as well as on the issue of cash deposits made during the year. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that the contentions made by the assessee during the appellate proceedings were different from those which were made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on the basis of the submissions and supporting evidences, which were made for the first time during the appellate proceedings and were in the nature of additional evidences, without allowing the Assessing Officer to examine the additional evidences as per Rule 46A(3) T. Rules 1962. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter or alter any ground/grounds, which may be necessary.” has filed a cross objection and these cross objections is basically supporting the CIT(A) order and her written submi As the issues are common, the appeal of department and cross objection of assessee are clubbed and a common order is passed there is delay of less than 1 month by both parties and after hearing the reasons Akshaya Ashok Ghole 2 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for In the above cited appeal, the Revenue has taken the following On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to furnish documentary movable properties as well as on the On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee without considering the fact that the contentions ee during the appellate proceedings were different from those which were made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in allowing ubmissions and supporting evidences, which were made for the first time during the appellate proceedings and were in the nature of additional evidences, without allowing the Assessing Officer to examine the additional evidences as per Rule 46A(3) The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter or alter any se cross objections is basically supporting the CIT(A) order and her written submissions before As the issues are common, the appeal of department and cross objection of assessee are clubbed and a common order is passed there is delay of less than 1 month by both parties and after hearing the reasons for delay the same is hereby condoned and the case is adjudicated on merits. The facts of the case are as follows : a) The Ld. AO issued 6 hearing notices, and there is response to only one notice, as observed from page 2 of assessment order and on 15/12/2022, the assessee relating to housing loan sanction letter, copy of will of mother law, copy of passbook of her husband etc. b) The first addition made is appellant into the bank account of GP Parekh Sahakari Bank to the extent of Rs. 59,29, As the appellant didn’t give proper explanation with respect to these deposits, addition of Rs. 59,29,000/ r.w.s. 115BBE c) The second additi unexplained investment u/s. 69 of IT Act r.w.s. 115BBE. Out of the total investment of Rs. the Ld. AO held that the appellant couldn’t investment to the The major amounts where Ld. AO was not satisfied and added are bank loan of SBI to the extent of Rs. 1,10,00,000/ 60,00,000/- received Ld. AO added Rs. 1,10,00,00 filed confirmation of loan me is hereby condoned and the case is adjudicated on merits. The facts of the case are as follows : The Ld. AO issued 6 hearing notices, and there is response to only one notice, as observed from page 2 of assessment order and on 15/12/2022, the assessee has submitted documents relating to housing loan sanction letter, copy of will of mother law, copy of passbook of her husband etc. The first addition made is with respect to appellant into the bank account of GP Parekh Sahakari Bank to the extent of Rs. 59,29,000/- including cash of Rs. 37,93,000/ As the appellant didn’t give proper explanation with respect to these deposits, addition of Rs. 59,29,000/- E of IT Act, as unexplained money. The second addition made by Ld. AO is with respect to the unexplained investment u/s. 69 of IT Act r.w.s. 115BBE. Out of the total investment of Rs. 2.53 Cr. while purchasing the flat, the Ld. AO held that the appellant couldn’t explain the source of investment to the extent of Rs. 1,72,00,000/ he major amounts where Ld. AO was not satisfied and added bank loan of SBI to the extent of Rs. 1,10,00,000/ received from sale of an immovable property. The Ld. AO added Rs. 1,10,00,000/- because the appellant has not confirmation of loan letter from SBI. Akshaya Ashok Ghole 3 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 me is hereby condoned and the case is adjudicated on The Ld. AO issued 6 hearing notices, and there is response to only one notice, as observed from page 2 of assessment order has submitted documents relating to housing loan sanction letter, copy of will of mother-in- with respect to deposits made by appellant into the bank account of GP Parekh Sahakari Bank to including cash of Rs. 37,93,000/-. As the appellant didn’t give proper explanation with respect to was made u/s. 69 of IT Act, as unexplained money. on made by Ld. AO is with respect to the unexplained investment u/s. 69 of IT Act r.w.s. 115BBE. Out of le purchasing the flat, explain the source of extent of Rs. 1,72,00,000/- and hence added. he major amounts where Ld. AO was not satisfied and added bank loan of SBI to the extent of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- and Rs. from sale of an immovable property. The because the appellant has not d) The Ld. DR has argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly addressed the issues and no opportunity was given to the AO and rule 46A(3) was violated. The CIT(A) has not called for remand report on the fresh evidence filed by the appellant and gave relief to her. Hence, the order of Ld. CIT(A) should be set aside and matter may be sent back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh examination. e) Per contra, Ld. AR of appellant, has argued that they have not filed any documents afresh before Ld. CIT(A). All this information is already before Ld. AO as the same was electronically filed. The AO has not taken into consideration all the documents filed by them during assessm held that the appellant has filed the required documents. In the similar circumstances, all documents were filed before the AO of her husband also. The copy of sanction letter of loan from SBI, Loans taken from persons and confirmation filed. The AO of her husband took all these documents and completed the scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3) of the IT Act after having satisfied about the loans taken from SBI and others. The property in question was purchased in the name of husband. The AO of her husband also asked questions about bank loan and other sources of cash deposits for which necessary evidences were produced. The Ld. AR of appellant has pleaded that since the issues are same, i.e., cash deposits and The Ld. DR has argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly addressed the issues and no opportunity was given to the AO and rule 46A(3) was violated. The CIT(A) has not called for remand report on the fresh evidence filed by the appellant and gave relief to her. Hence, the order of Ld. CIT(A) should be set aside and matter may be sent back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh Per contra, Ld. AR of appellant, has argued that they have not filed any documents afresh before Ld. CIT(A). All this information is already before Ld. AO as the same was electronically filed. The AO has not taken into consideration all the documents filed by them during assessment proceedings and held that the appellant has filed the required documents. In the similar circumstances, all documents were filed before the AO of her husband also. The copy of sanction letter of loan from SBI, Loans taken from persons and confirmation filed. The AO of her husband took all these documents and completed the scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3) of the IT Act after having satisfied about the loans taken from SBI and others. The property in question was purchased in the name of husband. The AO of her husband also asked questions about bank loan and other sources of cash deposits for which necessary evidences were produced. The Ld. AR of appellant has that since the issues are same, i.e., cash deposits and Akshaya Ashok Ghole 4 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 The Ld. DR has argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly addressed the issues and no opportunity was given to the AO and rule 46A(3) was violated. The CIT(A) has not called for the remand report on the fresh evidence filed by the appellant and gave relief to her. Hence, the order of Ld. CIT(A) should be set aside and matter may be sent back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh Per contra, Ld. AR of appellant, has argued in detail and stated that they have not filed any documents afresh before Ld. CIT(A). All this information is already before Ld. AO as the same was electronically filed. The AO has not taken into consideration all ent proceedings and held that the appellant has filed the required documents. In the similar circumstances, all documents were filed before the AO of her husband also. The copy of sanction letter of loan from SBI, Loans taken from persons and confirmation letters were also filed. The AO of her husband took all these documents and completed the scrutiny assessment u/s. 143(3) of the IT Act after having satisfied about the loans taken from SBI and others. The property in question was purchased in the name of wife and husband. The AO of her husband also asked questions about bank loan and other sources of cash deposits for which necessary evidences were produced. The Ld. AR of appellant has that since the issues are same, i.e., cash deposits and the sources for acquiring the same house property which is in joint names, the AO of the appellant can’t doubt the veracity sources for acquiring property. The Ld. AR of appellant has argued that the AO has disbelieved even bank loan of SBI and will of appella is totally uncalled for. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed a detailed of 14 pages mentioning the arguments of Ld. AO and appellant, after perusing the material placed before him, having applied his mind, has adj appellant which should not be disturbed. The Ld. CIT(A) has taken into consideration before AO and hence there is no violation of Rule 46A(3) contended by the Depar powers of CIT(A) perusal of the documents filed before him, after taking into consideration the fact the A.O of appellant accepted all the contentions of her husband and no additions were made. It was argued that, it is the fault of Ld. A.O, who has not taken into consideration the documents filed by them electronically and for his fault, the appellant should not be punished going to the Assessing Officer and again proving the same. The Ld. AR of appellant has also pleaded that both the appellant and her husband are going through very tough time in their life as their only young son age rces for acquiring the same house property which is in joint names, the AO of the appellant can’t doubt the veracity sources for acquiring property. The Ld. AR of appellant has argued that the AO has disbelieved even bank loan of SBI and will of appellant’s mother-in-law and added the amounts is totally uncalled for. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed a detailed of 14 pages mentioning the arguments of Ld. AO and appellant, after perusing the material placed before him, having applied his mind, has adjudicated the matter fairly and gave relief to the appellant which should not be disturbed. The Ld. CIT(A) has taken into consideration the documents which were already filed before AO and hence there is no violation of Rule 46A(3) contended by the Department. It was also argued that the of CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of A.O, and after perusal of the documents filed before him, after taking into consideration the fact the A.O of appellant accepted all the contentions of her husband and no additions were made. It was argued that, it is the fault of Ld. A.O, who has not taken into consideration the documents filed by them electronically and for his fault, the appellant should not be shed going to the Assessing Officer and again proving the same. The Ld. AR of appellant has also pleaded that both the appellant and her husband are going through very tough time in their life as their only young son aged 23 is Akshaya Ashok Ghole 5 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 rces for acquiring the same house property which is in joint names, the AO of the appellant can’t doubt the veracity of sources for acquiring property. The Ld. AR of appellant has argued that the AO has disbelieved even bank loan of SBI and law and added the amounts which is totally uncalled for. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed a detailed order of 14 pages mentioning the arguments of Ld. AO and appellant, after perusing the material placed before him, having applied his udicated the matter fairly and gave relief to the appellant which should not be disturbed. The Ld. CIT(A) has the documents which were already filed before AO and hence there is no violation of Rule 46A(3) as tment. It was also argued that the terminus with that of A.O, and after perusal of the documents filed before him, after taking into consideration the fact the A.O of appellant’s husband has accepted all the contentions of her husband and no additions were made. It was argued that, it is the fault of Ld. A.O, who has not taken into consideration the documents filed by them electronically and for his fault, the appellant should not be shed going to the Assessing Officer and again proving the same. The Ld. AR of appellant has also pleaded that both the appellant and her husband are going through very tough time in is undergoing kidney transplant and her husband is the donor of kidney. All fa members are running around hospitals as their son aged 23 is suffering from kidney problem and taking dialysis treatment for last 4 years for which they incurred huge expenses. The of appellant has all sources of cash deposits and purchase of property. It was further pleaded that herself and her husband are only government employees such circumstances, going back t explain the same sources is really difficult and it was submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be sustained and the appeal of Department may be dismissed. 5. Heard both sides in detail as clarification proceedings before ITAT and matter is adjudicated in of assessee for the following reasons : a) As mentioned in the beginning of this order, two additions were made and the first one relates to cash credits and other one relates to purchase of property addition relates to the sources for acquiring the flat mentioned in the assessment order 1,72,00,000/- loan and sale of old documents relating to bank loan from SBI including sanction of loan letter were filed before AO and and her husband is the donor of kidney. All fa are running around hospitals as their son aged 23 is suffering from kidney problem and taking dialysis treatment for last 4 years for which they incurred huge expenses. The of appellant has also filed a paper book giving reconciliation of all sources of cash deposits and purchase of property. It was further pleaded that herself and her husband are only employees and not doing any such circumstances, going back to the Department again to explain the same sources is really difficult and it was submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be sustained and the appeal of Department may be dismissed. Heard both sides in detail at the time of hearing s clarification proceedings before ITAT and matter is adjudicated in of assessee for the following reasons : As mentioned in the beginning of this order, two additions were the first one relates to cash credits one relates to purchase of property addition relates to the sources for acquiring the flat mentioned in the assessment order where the AO made an addition of Rs. - disbelieving the version of appellant about bank loan and sale of old immovable property. The relevant documents relating to bank loan from SBI including sanction of were filed before AO and before Ld. CIT(A) again. The Akshaya Ashok Ghole 6 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 and her husband is the donor of kidney. All family are running around hospitals as their son aged 23 is suffering from kidney problem and taking dialysis treatment for last 4 years for which they incurred huge expenses. The Ld. AR also filed a paper book giving reconciliation of all sources of cash deposits and purchase of property. It was further pleaded that herself and her husband are only other business. In o the Department again to explain the same sources is really difficult and it was submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may be sustained and the appeal of hearing proceedings as well s clarification proceedings before ITAT and matter is adjudicated in favour As mentioned in the beginning of this order, two additions were the first one relates to cash credits deposited in bank one relates to purchase of property. The major addition relates to the sources for acquiring the flat mentioned the AO made an addition of Rs. disbelieving the version of appellant about bank property. The relevant documents relating to bank loan from SBI including sanction of before Ld. CIT(A) again. The Ld. AR of appellant again filed the same before ITAT. The Ld. CIT(A) gave categorical finding that there is nothing to disbelieve the bank loan the remaining amount of Rs. 0.62 c and filed a copy of property by assessee taken as source for investment in the newly acquired flat, Rs. 60,00,000/- being sale of flat and Rs. 2,00,000/ old furniture w Since all the documents were filed before AO, CIT(A) and ITAT and all sources were explained, nothing survives for sustaining the addition made by AO, especially in the circumstances w AO of appellant assessment u/s. 143(3) 1,72,00,000/- addition. b) The second addition made by Ld. AO is with respect to cash deposits and amount tran appellant. An amount of Rs. 37,95, the appellant and an amount of Rs. 21,36,000/ to the bank account of appellant. The Ld. AO has treated both these amounts as “unexplained” and add and 69A. The arguments of Ld. DR and Ld. AR of appellant with regard to this source are on similar lines as that of investment appellant again filed the same before ITAT. The Ld. CIT(A) gave categorical finding that there is nothing to disbelieve loan from SBI to the extent of Rs. 1,10,00,000/ the remaining amount of Rs. 0.62 crore, the appellant has stated copy of sale Deed which evidenced the sale of property by assessee. This was also perused by Ld. CIT(A) and taken as source for investment in the newly acquired flat, Rs. being sale of flat and Rs. 2,00,000/ old furniture were received by the appellant and her husband. Since all the documents were filed before AO, CIT(A) and ITAT and all sources were explained, nothing survives for sustaining the addition made by AO, especially in the circumstances w AO of appellant’s husband has accepted the same in his scrutiny u/s. 143(3) with regard to the addition Rs. -. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly deleted the The second addition made by Ld. AO is with respect to cash deposits and amount transferred to the bank account of ellant. An amount of Rs. 37,95,000/- cash was deposited by the appellant and an amount of Rs. 21,36,000/ to the bank account of appellant. The Ld. AO has treated both these amounts as “unexplained” and addition was made u/s. 69 The arguments of Ld. DR and Ld. AR of appellant with regard to this source are on similar lines as that of investment Akshaya Ashok Ghole 7 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 appellant again filed the same before ITAT. The Ld. CIT(A) gave categorical finding that there is nothing to disbelieve to the extent of Rs. 1,10,00,000/-. For rore, the appellant has stated sale Deed which evidenced the sale of . This was also perused by Ld. CIT(A) and taken as source for investment in the newly acquired flat, Rs. being sale of flat and Rs. 2,00,000/- towards sale of ere received by the appellant and her husband. Since all the documents were filed before AO, CIT(A) and ITAT and all sources were explained, nothing survives for sustaining the addition made by AO, especially in the circumstances where sband has accepted the same in his scrutiny with regard to the addition Rs. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) has correctly deleted the The second addition made by Ld. AO is with respect to cash to the bank account of cash was deposited by the appellant and an amount of Rs. 21,36,000/- was transferred to the bank account of appellant. The Ld. AO has treated both ition was made u/s. 69 The arguments of Ld. DR and Ld. AR of appellant with regard to this source are on similar lines as that of investment made in property. The Ld. AR of appellant states that the details were furnished before AO and CIT(A), in the AO of appellant and no addition was made. The Ld. DR relied on the assessment order and Rule 46A(3) of IT rules. c) The AR of appellant has submitted a chart showing source of cash deposits and amounts transferred to her account. A copy of chart showing sources filed before ITAT also. Out of the cash deposits of Rs. 37,95,000/-, the Ld. AR of appellant has stated that an amount of Rs. 29,85,000/ passed away, bequeathing this amount as part of her and a copy of submitted in ITAT also savings and r from 5 persons, whole names, addresses, PAN and confirmation letters were submitted to lower authorities borrowed from each person is less than Rs. 2,00,000/ AR of appellant has submitted that the det by the Ld. CIT(A) on page 4 and 5 of his order. After examining all these documents, the CIT(A) was satisfied and gave relief, it was argued. made in property. The Ld. AR of appellant states that the details were furnished before AO and CIT(A), in similar circumstances, the AO of appellant’s husband has accepted all their contentions and no addition was made. The Ld. DR relied on the assessment order and Rule 46A(3) of IT rules. The AR of appellant has submitted a chart showing source of ts and amounts transferred to her account. A copy of chart showing sources which was submitted to Ld. CIT(A) was filed before ITAT also. Out of the cash deposits of Rs. , the Ld. AR of appellant has stated that an amount of Rs. 29,85,000/- was given to her by her mother passed away, bequeathing this amount as part of her a copy of this “Will Deed” filed before lower authorities was submitted in ITAT also. Rs. 2,10,000/- was stated to be her remaining amount of Rs. 7,08,000/ from 5 persons, whole names, addresses, PAN and confirmation letters were submitted to lower authorities borrowed from each person is less than Rs. 2,00,000/ AR of appellant has submitted that the details were by the Ld. CIT(A) on page 4 and 5 of his order. After examining all these documents, the CIT(A) was satisfied and gave relief, it Akshaya Ashok Ghole 8 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 made in property. The Ld. AR of appellant states that the details similar circumstances, s husband has accepted all their contentions and no addition was made. The Ld. DR relied on the assessment The AR of appellant has submitted a chart showing source of ts and amounts transferred to her account. A copy of submitted to Ld. CIT(A) was filed before ITAT also. Out of the cash deposits of Rs. , the Ld. AR of appellant has stated that an amount iven to her by her mother–in-law who passed away, bequeathing this amount as part of her “Will Deed” filed before lower authorities was was stated to be her of Rs. 7,08,000/- was borrowed from 5 persons, whole names, addresses, PAN and confirmation letters were submitted to lower authorities and the amount borrowed from each person is less than Rs. 2,00,000/-. The Ld. ails were mentioned by the Ld. CIT(A) on page 4 and 5 of his order. After examining all these documents, the CIT(A) was satisfied and gave relief, it d) With regard to the credit entries of Rs. 21,36,000/ account, it was stated that was transferred from her husband’s bank and he has already explained his sources to his Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer was satisfied and the assessment was completed wi of Income Tax Act. Remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ transferred to her bank account by their landlord who refunded the rental deposit. Thus, the Ld. AR of appellant has submitted that all sources were explained in detai of her husband, CIT(A) in her case with requisite details. Hence, it was submitted that there is no force in the argument of Revenue to send e) Heard both sides on the issue of cash deposi entries. In view of the following, confirmed. i. The addition relating to credit entries account was already explained to the AO of her husband who has accepted his submissions while completing th scrutiny assessment of her husband. Hence, credit entries representing amounts received from her husband correctly deleted by Ld. CIT(A). With regard to the credit entries of Rs. 21,36,000/ account, it was stated that the major amount of Rs. 19,00,000/ was transferred from her husband’s bank and he has already explained his sources to his Assessing Officer at the time of scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer was satisfied and the assessment was completed without any addition u/s. 143(3) of Income Tax Act. Remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/ transferred to her bank account by their landlord who refunded the rental deposit. Thus, the Ld. AR of appellant has submitted that all sources were explained in detail to the Assessing Officer of her husband, CIT(A) in her case with requisite details. Hence, it was submitted that there is no force in the argument of send the case back to AO for fresh adjudication. Heard both sides on the issue of cash deposi entries. In view of the following, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is The addition relating to credit entries into appellant’s bank account was already explained to the AO of her husband who has accepted his submissions while completing th scrutiny assessment of her husband. Hence, credit entries representing amounts received from her husband correctly deleted by Ld. CIT(A). Akshaya Ashok Ghole 9 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 With regard to the credit entries of Rs. 21,36,000/- in her bank the major amount of Rs. 19,00,000/- was transferred from her husband’s bank and he has already explained his sources to his Assessing Officer at the time of his scrutiny assessment and the Assessing Officer was satisfied and thout any addition u/s. 143(3) of Income Tax Act. Remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- was transferred to her bank account by their landlord who refunded the rental deposit. Thus, the Ld. AR of appellant has submitted the Assessing Officer of her husband, CIT(A) in her case with requisite details. Hence, it was submitted that there is no force in the argument of the case back to AO for fresh adjudication. Heard both sides on the issue of cash deposits and credit the order of Ld. CIT(A) is into appellant’s bank account was already explained to the AO of her husband who has accepted his submissions while completing the scrutiny assessment of her husband. Hence, credit entries representing amounts received from her husband was ii. The addition relating to the cash deposits is also deleted because necessary evidences relating to amount recei through “Will Deed” was furnished to lower authorities and deleted the addition after perusing and getting satisfied. iii. The other hand loans of Rs. 7,08,000/ along with confirmation letters, PAN of creditors and phone numbers. The small amounts received from 5 creditor is accepted in view of the fact that they could easily mobilize the same as b employees in the dire circumstances of getting their only son’s medical treatment iv. All these evidences were filed before AO, through electronic mode, they were filed before CIT(A) who elaborately discussed and gave relie authorities and in ITAT showing their son is kidney transplantation to kidney transplant, huge money was spent for her son’s dialysis treatment prior to 6. In view of above facts, evidences filed and peculiar circumstances, the appeal of Revenue to send the file back to AO is rejected and the appeal of department is dismissed. The cross objection filed by appellant is allowed as a same is basically supporting the order of CIT(A). The addition relating to the cash deposits is also deleted because necessary evidences relating to amount recei “Will Deed” of her mother-in-law who passed away was furnished to lower authorities and Ld. deleted the addition after perusing and getting satisfied. The other hand loans of Rs. 7,08,000/- were also explained along with confirmation letters, PAN of creditors and phone numbers. The small amounts received from 5 creditor is accepted in view of the fact that they could easily mobilize the same as both wife and husband are Government in the dire circumstances of getting their only son’s medical treatment. All these evidences were filed before AO, through electronic mode, they were filed before CIT(A) who elaborately discussed and gave relief. Several papers were filed before lower authorities and in ITAT showing their son is kidney transplantation and father being donor of kidney, prior to kidney transplant, huge money was spent for her son’s dialysis treatment prior to kidney transplant. facts, evidences filed and peculiar circumstances, the to send the file back to AO is rejected and the appeal of department is dismissed. The cross objection filed by appellant is allowed as a same is basically supporting the order of CIT(A). Akshaya Ashok Ghole 10 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 The addition relating to the cash deposits is also deleted because necessary evidences relating to amount received law who passed away Ld.CIT(A) has correctly deleted the addition after perusing and getting satisfied. were also explained along with confirmation letters, PAN of creditors and their phone numbers. The small amounts received from 5 creditors is accepted in view of the fact that they could easily mobilize oth wife and husband are Government in the dire circumstances of getting their only son’s All these evidences were filed before AO, through electronic mode, they were filed before CIT(A) who elaborately discussed f. Several papers were filed before lower authorities and in ITAT showing their son is still in hospital for and father being donor of kidney, prior to kidney transplant, huge money was spent for her son’s kidney transplant. facts, evidences filed and peculiar circumstances, the to send the file back to AO is rejected and the appeal of department is dismissed. The cross objection filed by appellant is allowed Order pronounced in the open Court on Sd/- (NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHARY JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated: 10/02/2025 Poonam Mirashi, Stenographer Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/02/202 Sd/ NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHARY) (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Akshaya Ashok Ghole 11 CO No. 98/MUM/2024 & ITA No. 3915/Mum/2023 /2025. Sd/- OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "