SURESH CHANDRA SHARMA,KANPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(4) KANPUR, KANPUR

ITA 19/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Suresh Chandra Sharma against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which confirmed an addition of Rs.11,29,500 to his income for the assessment year 2017-18. This addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer, suspecting the source of cash deposits in Sharma's bank account during the demonetization period. The Tribunal, after reviewing the submissions and evidence presented, concluded that the deposits were from legitimate sources, including past savings and household expenses, and thus allowed the appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31927 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJEEV KRISHNA SHARMA
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.19/LKW/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Suresh Chandra Sharma 414 B-Block, Panki, Kanpur- 208009. v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4) Kanpur-208001. PAN:AXXPS3471M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”]-10, dated 14/11/2024 for the assessment year 2017-18. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. Because the authorities below erred in law and on fact in making an addition of Rs.11,29,500/on account of cash deposit by assessee in his Bank account during demonetization period, under section 69A read under section 115BBE of the Act. 2. Because the authorities below failed to appreciate that the source of cash deposit stood properly explained out of accumulated cash in hand from cash withdrawals from Bank and past savings. 3. Because under that facts and circumstances of assessee and his spouse the impugned addition of Rs.11,29,500/is not sustainable in law and on facts. 4. Because under the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned addition of Rs.11,29,500/is based on surmises and conjectures and without any evidence. 5. The assessee craves leave to modify any grounds of appeal herein before or take additional ground (s) during pendency of this appeal. 6. Any other ground (s) or relief (s) as your kind honour may deem appropriate or fit under the given circumstances.” ITA No.19/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 4 2. In this case, assessment order dated 17/12/2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.16,51,450/- as against the returned income of Rs.5,21,950/-. In the aforesaid assessment order an addition of Rs.11,29,500/- was made by the Assessing Officer on account of cash deposit by the assessee in bank. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 14.11.2024 whereby he confirmed the aforesaid addition of Rs.11,29,500/-. Both the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A) disbelieved the submissions made by the Assessee that the aforesaid amount of Rs.11,29,500/- was deposited by the assessee in bank account out of withdrawal made in the past for the marriage of the assessee’s daughter and household expenses. 2.1 At the time of hearing, the assessee was represented by none. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative (“DR”, for short) for Revenue was heard. He relied on the orders passed by the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). 3. The Ld. Sr. DR for Revenue has been heard and materials on record have been perused. On perusal of the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 14.11.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A), it is found that the assessee’s submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A) are contained in paragraph no. 5.1 to 5.5 which in the ease of reference. It is found that the assessee had withdrawn from the bank account, amount total of which was Rs.38,58,500/- as mentioned in paragraph no. 8 of the assessee’s submissions made in the office of Ld. CIT(A). Further, it was submitted by the assessee during appellate proceedings in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), vide paragraph no. 7 of the assessee’s submissions filed ITA No.19/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 4 in the course of appellate proceedings in the office of the Ld. CIT(A), that the assessee’s wife also provided cash to the assessee out of savings (stridhan) out of funds provided to her for household expenses, as she did not maintain any bank account of her own. In view of these facts and circumstances, it is found that deposit made by assessee amounting to Rs.11,29,500/- is fully explained by withdrawals made by assessee from the bank for household expenses and for marriage of the assessee’s daughter. The explanation of the assessee is further supported by the contention that assessee’s wife who did not maintain any bank account of her own, also had accumulated savings out of funds given to her household expenses, and that she, as a result, had cash in hand as stridhan. Thus, the submission made by the assessee that deposits made by the assessee in bank account is treated as genuinenly explained by way savings made by assessee and his wife. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition of the aforesaid amount of Rs.11,29,500/-. Accordingly, the aforesaid impugned appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the appeal of the assessee is allowed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/02/2025. Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 27/02/2025 ITA No.19/LKW/2025 Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar "