-आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 33/Hyd/2024 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Bhargav Thommandru KURNOOL [PAN No.AGNPT7218C] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, KURNOOL अपीलाथŎ / Appellant Ů̝ यथŎ / Respondent िनधाŊįरती Ȫारा/Assessee by: Shri A. Srinivas, CA राज̾ व Ȫारा/Revenue by: Shri Aravindakshan, DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 11/07/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement on: 23/07/2024 आदेश / ORDER Aggrieved by the order dated 30/11/2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NaƟonal Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Bhargav Thommandru (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2017-18, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Assessee is an individual. He filed the return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 24 2/8/2017 declaring a total income of ₹ 3,50,010/-. Learned Assessing Officer noƟced that there were cash deposits to the tune of ₹ 14.54 Lacs in the bank accounts of the assessee during the monitoring period. Assessee furnished the copies of the Andhra Bank Account No. 088410027070848 Statement for the financial year 2016-17 and also the copies of the ComputaƟon of Income Statement; Page 2 of 3 Capital Account, Cash Book, Bank Book and Ledger for the financial year 2016-17 and pleaded that he received giŌs in cash from his parents, grand parents and close blood relaƟons during the year. Learned Assessing Officer did not believe the capacity of the donors and made the addiƟon of enƟre deposit amount to the income of the assessee. When the assessee preferred appeal learned CIT(A) also did not believe the version of the assessee and upheld the addiƟon. Hence the assessee filed this appeal. 3. Ld. AR submiƩed that the parents of the assessee giŌed ₹ 3 Lacs each and they are the Income Tax assessees showing taxable income of about Rs. 4 and have Lacs and ₹ 3.25 lakhs respecƟvely. So also, the grandfather and grandmother of the assessee who giŌed a sum of ₹ 2 lakhs and ₹ 2.5 Lacs also happens to be an Income Tax assessee. He submiƩed that the authoriƟes did not dispute the income declared by these persons. 4. Per contra, learned DR placed reliance on the orders of the authoriƟes and submiƩed that there is no evidence to show the agricultural income and also any withdrawals from the accounts of these persons and therefore, the giŌs are highly suspicious. 5. I have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. The assessee had furnished the names of 7 people to have given cash giŌs. Out of the 7 persons for persons, namely, the parents and grandparents of the assessee are income taxpayers and declared income, as stated by the learned AR. It is not the case of the Revenue that there was a dispute in respect of the amount menƟoned in this income tax returns filed by the parents and grandparents of the assessee. I am therefore, inclined to accept the giŌs given by the parents and grandparents of the assessee and direct the learned Assessing Officer to delete the addiƟon to the extent of ₹ 10.5 Lacs. The source of other donors is not established. Therefore, I confirm the rest of the addiƟon. Page 3 of 3 6. In the result, appeal is allowed in part. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 23 rd day July, 2024. Sd/- (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 23/07/2024 PVV/SPS Copy forwarded to: 1. Shri Bhargav Thommandru, 43-8F/7C, Simhapuri Colony, N.R. PETA KURNOOL 518004 Dist A.P 2. Income Tax Officer, Opp: Children’s Park, Kurnool 518001 3. Pr.CIT, Kurnool. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD