INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-28(5), SPM CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI V. ANJALI GUPTA, NEW DELHI

ITA 3198/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against Anjali Gupta, concerning the deletion of an addition of Rs. 78 lakhs by the CIT(A). The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 69A, suspecting that the cash deposits during the year, including Rs. 18 lakhs during the demonetization period, were unexplained. The AO doubted the assessee's explanation that these deposits were from cash withdrawals in earlier years. However, the CIT(A) found merit in the assessee's arguments and evidence, leading to the deletion of the addition. The Tribunal, after reviewing the detailed submissions and evidence, concurred with the CIT(A)'s findings and dismissed the Revenue's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471796 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH TRIPATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: SUSHIL WADHWA
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘A’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No:- 3198/Del/2023 (Assessment Year- 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(5), SPM Civic Centre, New Delhi. Vs. Anjali Gupta, New Delhi. PAN No: AAAPG6449H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri Sushil Wadhwa, CA Date of Hearing : 11.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.03.2025 ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM: This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [for short hereinafter referred to as the “(Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 07.10.2022, for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Ld. Departmental Representative (‘DR’) informed that the only issue arising in the present appeal is the action of Ld. CIT(A) in ITA no.- 3198/Del/2023 Anjali Gupta Page 2 of 5 deleting the addition of Rs. 78 lakhs made by the Ld. AO, under Section 69A of the Act. It was submitted that the case pertains to cash deposits made during the year. The assessee was reportedly earning income from house property as well as other sources. Verification of bank statement maintained with the Federal Bank indicated cash deposit of Rs. 78 lakhs out of which Rs. 18 lakhs was made in the demonetization period. On being queried, by the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’), the assessee informed that the cash deposit represents cash withdrawals in earlier period viz financial year 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16. The Ld. AO doubted the hypothesis propounded by the assessee as to the need for making such heavy cash withdrawals without any specific purpose. Consequently, holding that there is no connection between the cash withdrawals and the corresponding deposit as also applying the human probability test of keeping large cash idle at home, the Ld. AO made the impugned addition of Rs. 78 lakhs. The Ld. DR, thus, argued that the action of the Ld. AO is as per correct appreciation of the facts of the case and deserves to be sustained. The Ld. DR submitted that the relief accorded by Ld. CIT(A) is not based upon true appreciation of the facts and that the argument of AO making addition on conjectures and premises is incorrect. The ITA no.- 3198/Del/2023 Anjali Gupta Page 3 of 5 Ld. Counsel for the assessee argued that, the Ld. First Appellate Authority has accorded relief after comprehensively analysis the full fact of the case and the evidence on record. 3. We have heard rival submission in the light of the material available on record. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed a detailed Paper Book showing cash withdrawals and deposits made by the assessee in previous financial years. It was contended that the assessee has withdrawn cash withdrawals in F.Y. 2015-16 and that the closing cash in hand as on 31.03.2016, was Rs. 64,85,476/-. It was stated that out of the same cash deposit of Rs. 60 lakhs was made on 19.05.2016. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the impugned amount of Rs. 64,85,476/-, was also offered by it in its wealth tax return, for A.Y. 2016-17. Necessary copies of wealth tax return have also been filed by the assessee in support of his contention. Upon considerations of the cash withdrawals and deposits made by the assessee in previous financial years as well as perusal of wealth tax return, we are of the view that there exists a proximate nexus between cash withdrawals of previous financial years and cash deposits made in the present year. Accordingly, we are of the view that ITA no.- 3198/Del/2023 Anjali Gupta Page 4 of 5 there is no case for interference with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), at this stage. Therefore, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and all the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 4. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13.03.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (AMITABH SHUKLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13/03/2025. Pooja/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI ITA no.- 3198/Del/2023 Anjali Gupta Page 5 of 5 1. Date of dictaƟon of Tribunal order 11.3.25 2. Date on which the typed draŌ Tribunal Order is placed before the DictaƟng Member 11.3.25 3. Date on which the typed draŌ Tribunal order is placed before the other Member 4. Date on which the approved draŌ Tribunal order comes to the Sr. PS/PS 5. Date on which the fair Tribunal order is placed before the DictaƟng Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr.PS/PS 7. Date on which the final Tribunal order is uploaded by the Sr.PS/PS on official website 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk alongwith Tribunal order 9 Date of killing off the disposed of files on the judisis Portal of ITAT by the Bench Clerks 10. Date on which the file goes to the Supervisor (Judicial) 11. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for endorsement of the order 12. Date of Despatch of the order "