Manoj Kumar Jain, New Delhi V. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

ITA 2332/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8492 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 20-02-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 69; 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2331/Del/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) ITA No.2332/Del/2023 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Manoj Kumar Jain, vs. ACIT, Central Circle 14, D-1/113, SF, Sector 16, New Delhi. Rohini, New Delhi – 110 089. (PAN : AAAPJ0445J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Ms. Shivangi Kumar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 21.02.2024 Date of Order : 28.02.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These are appeals by the assessee against the orders of ld. CIT (Appeals)-28, New Delhi both dated 20.06.2023 for the AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. The assessee has taken the following common grounds of appeal except the difference in amount :- 2 ITA Nos.2331 & 2332/Del/2023 “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the authorities have erred in confirming addition of Rs.1,08,500/- & Rs.2,61,000/- for the AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19 respectively on account of unexplained deposits into back accounts under section 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. The action of the authorities below is wrong, illegal, misconceived, unjustified and bad at law therefore it should be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the authorities have erred in charging interest u/s 234A & interest u/s 234B. The action of the authorities are wrong, illegal, misconceived, unjustified and bad at law therefore it should be quashed.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessment order was framed in this case under section 153A r.w.s. 143 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’). AO made various additions. 4. Upon assessee’s appeal, ld. CIT (A) granted substantial relief but he sustained the addition on account of unexplained deposits into bank amounting to Rs.1,08,500/- and Rs.2,61,000/- for AYs 2017-18 & 2018-19. 5. Assessee’s plea in this regard was that assessee has filed affidavit from his father and brother contributing this amount to the assessee. But this plea was not accepted on the ground that they have low income or that source of income is not given in detail. 3 ITA Nos.2331 & 2332/Del/2023 6. Upon careful consideration and perusing the records, we find that the amount involved is very small but there is no presumption that the people having low income cannot have small savings. In this view of the matter, we set aside the orders of the authorities below and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 28 th day of February, 2024. Sd/- sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (SHAMIM YAHYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated the 28 th day of February, 2024 TS Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-28, New Delhi. 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.