Nainika Agarwal, Gurugram V. ITO, Ward 3(1), Gurugram

ITA 1586/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2890 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 20-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Kul Bharat, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 1586/Del/2023 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Nainika Agarwal, House No. 122, Sector-14, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Gurgaon, Haryana (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BWAPA7121F Assessee by : Sh. D. C. Garg, CA Revenue by : Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 21.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 22.06.2023 ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member: The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 24.02.2023. 2. Following grounds have been raised by the assessee: “1. That Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi has erred in law as well as on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 2,40,000/- out of addition of Rs. 2,43,000/- made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), Gurgaon (Assessing Officer). 2. That Learned NFAC as well as Ld. Assessing Officer failed in appreciating the facts correctly as the Appellant already incorporated cash deposits in to her bank account while computing her return of income which has been filed well within the time prescribed under section 139(1)of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ITA No. 1586/Del/2023 Nainika Agarwal 2 Hence, further addition on account of cash deposit is a double taxation on the same income. 3. That Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi has erred in law as well as on facts while not considering the verdicts of Jurisdictional High Court on identical facts cited by the Appellant. 4. That Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi erred in facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law in presuming submission during Appellate proceedings as additional evidences on whimsy ground. 5. That Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi and Ld. Assessing Officer both has erred in computing tax under section 115BBE without mentioning any provision of Income Tax Act, 1961.” Addition of Rs. 2,40,000/-: 3. The AO made addition of Rs.2,40,000/- pertaining to the cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee during the demonetization period. It was submitted that the assessee is earning income from tuition and already declared a returned income of Rs.2,97,150/- and filed return of income on 29.07.2017 and thus, the cash deposits have been duly explained. The ld. AR has also relied on the Instruction of the CBDT No. Instruction No. 03/2017 dated 21st of February, 2017 wherein it was directed that in case of an individual (other than minors) not having any business income, no further verification is required to be made if total cash deposit is up to 2.5 lakh. Hence, keeping in view the fact that the assessee earned income from the tuitions, the deposits have been reflected in the bank account, the return has been duly filed declaring such income and there were no other deposits in the bank account ITA No. 1586/Del/2023 Nainika Agarwal 3 other than the deposits pertaining to which the income has already been declared, we hold that no further addition is called for in the instant case. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22/06/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Kul Bharat) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 22/06/2023 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR