UMA JAYANTIKUMAR SHAH,VADODARA V. INCOMETAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5) VADODARA, VADODARA

ITA 1913/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Uma Jayantikumar Shah against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai, which upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary issues were the additions made under section 69A of the Income Tax Act concerning unexplained cash deposits and additional household expenses. The assessee argued that the cash deposits were business receipts and that the household expenses were understated. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the nature of the business, ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeal and deleting the contested additions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837994 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VEERBADRAM VISLAVATH
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL BRAHMAKSHATRIYA
• Section: 44AD

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1913/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Uma Jayantikumar Shah, 37B Purushottam Nagar, Parshav Tarrace, Akota, Vadodara-390020. [PAN :AFRPS0259 R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(5), Vadodara. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, AR Respondent by: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 18.07.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Mumbai, relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The deputy commissioner of income tax, Circle-1(1)(2), vadodara, has erred in passing the order in the manner he had done and assessing the income of Rs.12,96,434/- against income of Rs.2,04,010/- as per return of income. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1913/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2– 2. He erred in making the addition of Rs.8,42,424/- under section 69A on account of cash deposited in bank without appreciating the facts of the case. 3. He also erred in making addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on account of house hold expenses without considering facts of the case and income of family members. 4. The appellant prayed to delete the above addition. 5. The appellant craves leave to make any addition/deletion or change of the above grounds of appeal before the time of hearing. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed return of income for AY 2012-13. As per the information available, the assessee had made cash deposit of Rs.10,46,434/- during the year under consideration. Vide notice u/s.133(6) dated 20.02.2019, the assessee was asked to furnish the details in respect of cash deposit. However, the assessee failed to comply with the said notice. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was re-opened and notice u/s.148 was issued on 28.03.2019. The assessee filed the return of income on 10.07.2019 declaring total income of Rs.2,04,010/- under the provisions of section 44AD of the Act. Notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued on 07.09.2019. The assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was completed on 21.11.2019 wherein the AO made the following additions/disallowances: (i) Addition of Rs.8,42,424/- u/s.69A of the Act. (ii) Addition of Rs.2,50,000/- on account of household expenses. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A), who dismissed the appealfiled by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1913/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3– 5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal. 6. From the submission made by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee made cash deposit of Rs.10,46,434/- in her bank account. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that she was small business woman selling biscuits, dry power, juice power etc. and the items are dispatched through courier to various places and the cash pertains to the receipt of the goods by the customers. The total sale was Rs.10.46 lakhs and the amount u/s.44AD was less than the taxable limit. Hence, no return was filed. Keeping in view the specific fact of the case we hold that no addition is called for on account of household expenditure and the cash deposits. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 18.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/-/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 18.02.2026 MV Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1913/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 4– आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order: 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, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "