SANEEV CHAWLA,GHAZIABAD V. ITO,WARD-2(2)(4), GHAZIABAD

ITA 1082/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sanjeev Chawla, a transporter, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 13,05,880 to his income as unexplained cash deposits under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that these deposits were part of his declared gross turnover from the transport business. The Tribunal, after examining the submissions and the bank statements, found the assessee's explanation credible and reversed the lower authorities' decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 360739 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SAHIL SHARMA; SANJEEV PRASHAR; ADVOCATES
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Presumptive income
• Section: 44AD

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.1082/िदʟी/2025(िन.व. 2012-13) ITA No.1082/DEL/2025 (A.Y.2012-13) Sanjeev Chawla, S/o Shri Krishan Lal Chawla, H.No. 286, Vivekanand Nagar, Ghaziabad, UP 201002 PAN: AMVPC-4308-G ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(4), CGO Complex-I, Purani Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad, UP 201002 ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/ Appellant by : S/Shri Sahil Sharma & Sanjeev Prashar, Advocates ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 19/05/2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 19/05/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 20.03.2024, for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The appeal is time barred by 270 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by Medical Certificate. After perusal of same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, but is for the reasons stated in the condonation petition which appears to be bonafide. Hence, delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 2 ITA No.1082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) 3. Shri Sahil Sharma appearing on behalf of the assessee at the outset submitted that he is not pressing ground of appeal no. 2 to 4 challenging validity of the assessment. In light of the statement made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, grounds of appeal no. 2 to 4 are dismissed as not pressed. 4. In ground no. 5 & 6 of appeal, the assessee has assailed addition of Rs.13,05,880/- made u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on account of unexplained cash deposits. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee is a transporter. During Financial Year 2011-12, relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee had taken some trucks from Smt. Vinita Jha and Shri Sunil Jha for plying on rent. During Financial Year 2011-12, the assessee had declared gross turn over from transport business Rs.14,50,000/- . The assessee filed his return of income for AY 2012-13 u/s. 44AD of the Act offering income to tax on presumptive basis. Cash deposits in the bank aggregating to Rs.13,00,000/- over the period of one year is the part of gross turnover of the assessee. He refers to bank statement at pages 20 & 21 of the paper book. He pointed that the aforesaid bank account has been reflected in the return of income. He contended that the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A) has disbelieved the explanation furnished by the assessee regarding source of cash deposits. 5. Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. 6. Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The solitary addition which is subject matter of appeal is addition on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account amounting to Rs.13,05,880/-. It is emanating from records that the aforesaid amount was deposited by the assessee over the 3 ITA No.1082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) period of 12 months. The contention of the assessee is that the assessee is a transporter and cash deposits in the bank account are part of gross turnover of the assessee Rs.14,50,000/- which is duly reflected in the return of income. The assessee has offered income to tax u/s. 44AD of the Act. The bank account in which cash deposits have been made has been duly reflected in the return of income. Therefore, it can be safely presumed that the cash deposits in the said bank account have been included by the assessee in the return income being part of gross total turnover. I find the explanation furnished by the assessee plausible. The findings of the CIT(A) on this issue are reversed and ground no. 5 & 6 of appeal is allowed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid. Order pronounced in the open court on Monday the 19th day May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 19.05.2025 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. 4 ITA No.1082/Del/2025 (AY 2012-13) BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI "