LAXMANBHAI DANUMAL BHIMANI,GANDHINAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD-4, MEHSANA

ITA 274/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Laxmanbhai Danumal Bhimani against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed the disallowance of Rs. 11,00,000 as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had made these deposits during the demonetization period, which were scrutinized under a limited scrutiny selection by the Centralized Action System (CASS). The Assessing Officer initially treated these deposits as unexplained income due to non-compliance in providing satisfactory explanations. However, upon appeal to the Tribunal, the assessee provided sufficient evidence, including bank statements and explanations for the source of the deposits, which the Tribunal accepted, leading to the allowance of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781471 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 03-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENKUMAR M. VASAVDA
• Assessee Lawyers: JIMI PATEL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 274/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Laxmanbhai Danumal Bhimani, EL-2, Surmaya Seven, Shilaj Nandoli Road, Nandoli, Kalol, Gandhinagar-382115 [PAN : AEBPB 5611 F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Mehsana. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Jimi Patel, AR Respondent by: Shri Rajenkumar M. Vasavda, Sr DR Date of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 04.09.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short], under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ for short], relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “01. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs.11,00,000/- being alleged unexplained cash deposit u/s 69A of the Act without appreciating facts and law of the case properly. 02. Without prejudice to above, Ld. Assessing Officer erred in law and facts in taxing the income for which addition has been made at Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 274/Ahd/2025 Laxmanbhai Danumal Bhimani Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 special rate mentioned in Section 115BBE of the Act without appreciating that amendment made in Section 115BBE will be applicable from AY 2018-19 onwards and not application for AY 2017-18 which is assessment year under question.” 3. In this case, the return of income was filed by the assessee on 21.06.2017 declaring total income of Rs.2,96,860/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for Limited Scrutiny through CASS, to examine/verify the cash deposit during demonetization period amounting to Rs.11,00,000/-. Since the assessee was neither replied nor submitted any explanation regarding the source of cash deposits before the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A), noting non- compliance and lack of supporting documents, confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the outset, it was submitted that the assessee had responded to the notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act and also to the notices issued u/s 143(1) on 09.04.2019 and 12.10.2019. The assessee submitted that he has filed reply to the show-cause issued and submitted bank statements and return of income for previous two years which the Revenue Authorities ignored. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 274/Ahd/2025 Laxmanbhai Danumal Bhimani Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 had made cash deposits of Rs.11,00,000/- on 21.11.2016 in Cosmos Bank account and the source of which are cash withdrawal of Rs.8,00,000/- for the marriage function of daughter, Rs. 89,100/- towards the rent received in cash and Rs.2,10,900/- out of personal savings. We have gone through the bank statements, withdrawals made and considered the factum of marriage in the family. Since the withdrawals are not in dispute and personal savings to the tune of Rs.2,10,900/- can be considered as normal, we hold that no addition u/s 69A of the Act is called for. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 30.09.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 30.09.2025 **Btk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "