ITO, WARD 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD V. SURESHBHAI GAFULBHAI VALIYA, AHMEDABAD

ITA 671/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Income Tax Officer against the decision of the CIT(A), which had deleted an addition of Rs. 1,53,91,343 made by the Assessing Officer. The addition was initially made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, concerning unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The CIT(A) found that the assessee had provided adequate documentation to explain the cash deposits, which included details of cash collections from customers for embroidery work. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the evidence provided by the assessee was not challenged by the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 771861 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JIGNESH PARIKH
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.671/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad Vs. Sureshbhai Gafulbhai Valiya, GF-33 & FF-133, Malhar Industrial Estate, Odhav Ring Road, Odhav, Gujarat-382415 [PAN No.AEOPV0566N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Jignesh Parikh, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 09.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 25.08.2025 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JM: This appeal has been filed by the Revenue is filed against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi on 16.01.2025 for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under: “(a) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,53,91,343/- made by AO on account of unexplained cash deposit in bank account u/s 68 of the Act despite the fact that: (i) The assessee has failed to furnish sufficient documents to establish the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction of cash sales. (ii) The assessee has failed to submit any cogent reason for cash withdrawals and deposit of the same again in the bank account. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 671/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Sureshbhai Gafulbhai Valiya Asst.Year–2017-18 - 2 - (b) The appellant craves leave to add, alter and / or to amend all or any the ground before the final hearing of the appeal.” 3. The assessee is an individual filed return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 11.08.2017 declaring total income of Rs. 4,95,850/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS to verify cash deposits. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and made addition of Rs. 1,53,91,432/- under Section 68 of the Act as unexplained cash deposits. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,53,91,343/- despite the fact that the assesse failed to furnish sufficient documents to establish the identity creditworthiness and genuineness of the transaction of the cash sales. The Ld. DR further submitted that the assessee failed to submit any cogent reason for cash withdrawals and deposit of same in the bank account. 6. The Ld. AR relied upon the order of CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee during the appellate proceedings have filed the details related to the cash deposits and the cash withdrawals in respect of its cash collection from customers from the embroidery work done by the assessee. The submissions before the CIT(A) is most specifically reproduced in Para 6.2.2 by the CIT(A) of the order dated 16.01.2025. The CIT(A) has called for the remand report and the same is reproduced in Para 6.2.3 of the said order. The said remand report clearly stated that the assessee submitted the copy of assessment order, cash book, the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 671/Ahd/2025 ITO vs. Sureshbhai Gafulbhai Valiya Asst.Year–2017-18 - 3 - sample cash sale invoices as well as the copy of bank account statement alongwith copy of ledger account of customer application. The said details were not doubted by the Assessing Officer in his remand report and therefore, categorically the CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee. There is no discrepancy pointed out by the Ld. DR in respect of these evidences and therefore, the appeal filed by the Revenue does not survive. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 25/08/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) VICE PRESIDENT (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 25/08/2025 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 18.08.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 18.08.2025 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .08.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .08.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 22.08.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 22.08.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Despatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "