JYOTI SINGLA,DELHI V. ITO, WARD-28(4), DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 4019/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jyoti Singhla, who appealed against the order of the NFAC confirming the addition of Rs 21,96,500 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to unaccounted cash deposits in her bank account totaling Rs 26,13,600. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) initially assessed these deposits as unexplained, leading to a reopened assessment for the year 2012-13. The NFAC partially accepted Singhla's explanations for some deposits but sustained a significant addition. The Tribunal found that the NFAC had incorrectly endorsed the ITO's view regarding the total amount of unexplained deposits and restored the matter to the NFAC for a thorough factual verification.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772509 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NEERAJ MAGLA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Gift; Competent authority
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4019/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Jyoti Singhla, 101, Arjun Nagar, New Delh Vs. ITO, Ward-28(4), Delhi PAN: ANUPS5253J Assessee by : Shri Neeraj Magla, CA Revenue by: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11/08/2025 Date of pronouncement 27/08/2025 O R D E R 1. The appeal in ITA No.4019/Del/2025 for AY 2013-14 arises out of the order of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1062685388(1) dated 15.03.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 04.12.2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by ITO, Ward-24(4), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. At the outset, I find that there is a delay in filing of appeal by the assessee by 385 days before me. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition supported with an affidavit placed on record, I am inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 3. The only issue to be decided on merits in this appeal is as to whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made on account of deposits made in the bank account in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4019/Del/2025 Jyoti Singhla Page | 2 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The Learned AO noted that assessee had made cash deposit of Rs 26,13,600/- in the bank account. Since, no return of income was filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13, the Learned AO recorded reasons that income of the assessee to the tune of Rs 26,13,600/- had escaped assessment and proceeded to reopen the assessment vide issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act on 29-3-2019 after taking prior approval of the competent authority in terms of section 151 of the Act. No return of income was filed by the assessee even in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The Learned AO issued notice under section 142(1) of the Act asking the assessee to explain the source of deposits in the bank account which also stood uncomplied. A final show-cause notice dated 30-11-2019 was issued by the Learned AO to the assessee. The assessee did not avail the said show-cause notice and did not file any reply therein. Accordingly, the Learned AO proceeded to add the entire cash deposits in the sum of Rs 26,13,600/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act on 04-12-2019. 5. Before the Learned NFAC, the assessee submitted the entire bank statement which contained actual cash deposit of Rs 13,13,600/- as against Rs 26,13,600/- added by the Learned AO. The assessee sought to explain the source of cash deposit as under:- a) Sale proceeds of residential house for Rs 9,50,000/- received through Demand Draft and Rs 50,000/- in cash b) Gift from Mr. Praveen Kumar Agarwal, husband of the assessee on 9- 05-2011 vide Cheque No. 930936 – Rs 4,00,000/- c) Gift from Mr. Ashish Agarwal, nephew of the assessee on 24-05-2011 vide Cheque No. 214458 – Rs 1,00,000/- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4019/Del/2025 Jyoti Singhla Page | 3 d) Sale proceeds of two residential houses for Rs 5,00,000/- each e) Cash deposited out of past savings – Rs 3,13,600/- 6. The Learned NFAC observed that the sale proceeds of the residential house of Rs 10 lakhs is not available as credit for the assessee as the assessee had purchased another residential house for Rs 19,96,500/-. Gift from Ashish Agarwal, Nephew in the sum of Rs 1,00,000/- is not supported by any evidence and hence the same is not available as a source for deposit made in the bank account. As far as the past savings of Rs 3,13,600/- is concerned, the Learned NFAC observed that there is no evidence filed by the assessee in the form of earlier year income tax returns to justify the past savings. However, he gave credit of Rs 1,00,000/- and ultimately sustained the addition to the extent of Rs 21,96,500/-. 7. The learned AR pleaded that actual cash deposit made in the bank account is only Rs 13,13,600/- and relied on the bank statement enclosed in Pages 11 and 12 of the Paper Book. On perusal of the said bank statement, I find that totally only a sum of Rs 13,13,600/- is deposited in cash. The other deposits represent Rs 4,00,000/- and Rs 1,00,000/- which were stated to be gift received by the assessee from her husband and nephew respectively by cheque. Further a sum of Rs 9,50,000/- is deposited which represent sale proceeds of property received in demand draft on 21-7-2011. Apart from this, only a sum of Rs 826, and Rs 34 are being credited as Savings Bank Interest and Rs 100 and Rs 500 are credited without any verifiable details. Hence it could be seen that most of the deposits remain unexplained by the assessee. But at the same time, I find that the Learned NFAC had wrongly endorsed the view of the Learned AO that cash deposit of Rs 26.13,600/- had been made in the instant case, which is factually incorrect. The entire matter requires factual verification by the Learned NFAC. Accordingly, I deem it fit and appropriate to restore this issue to the file of Learned NFAC for de novo adjudication of the entire dispute in accordance Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4019/Del/2025 Jyoti Singhla Page | 4 with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to raise fresh grounds, if any, and furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of his contentions. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Learned NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments except due to exceptional or bona fide circumstances. With these observations, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/08/2025. -Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 27/08/2025 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "