VANITA DILIPRAO DEHANKAR,AMRAVATI V. ITO WARD -3, AMRAVATI

ITA 207/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Vanita Diliprao Dehankar, an agriculturist, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 15 lakhs to her income for the assessment year 2017-2018. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, questioning the source of deposits made by the assessee. The Tribunal, after considering the nature of the assessee's agricultural activities and the practicalities of cash transactions in such operations, decided in favor of the assessee, leading to the deletion of the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471268 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY Y. MARATHE; ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE. I
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.207/NAG./2024 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2017-2018 Vanita Diliprao Dehankar, Flat No.3, Nilambar Residency, Near Allhabad Bank, Rathi Nagar, AMRAVATI – 444 604. Maharashtra. PAN ALUPD9894N vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, AMRAVATI. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.01.2025 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.01.2024 of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”], Delhi, relating to assessment year 2017-2018. 2. None appeared for assessee despite service of notice. I accordingly, proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the Learned DR. 2 ITA.No.207/NAG./2024 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an agriculturist, filed her return of income for the impugned assessment year 2017-2018 on 23.05.2021 declaring total income at Rs.70,241/- and net agricultural income of Rs.2,50,000/- and deposit of Rs.2,46,500/- with Abhinandan Bank. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/sec.143(2) r.w.s.147 and 142(1) calling for certain details from the assessee with respect to the deposits made with the bank. In response to the said notices, the assessee filed requisite details and explanation that he is a farmer growing oranges, banana, vegetables as well as cotton crop in his ac.4.5 irrigated land and the agriculture produce is sold by him from home and the concerned business man receives the agriculture produce directly from his home. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee and made addition of Rs.15 lakhs u/sec.68 of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.15,70,240/- vide order dated 23.03.2022. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing 3 ITA.No.207/NAG./2024 Officer on the ground that assessee has not furnished relevant details called for despite issuance of various notices. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. I have heard the Learned DR and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that the assessee is an agriculturist and derives income out of agricultural produce. When the assessee is carrying agricultural operations like growing oranges, bananas, vegetables and cotton crop etc., he takes all these products to the market and receives cash in normal parlance of small quantities and for that nobody will give cheque payment and, therefore, producing bills and vouchers by the assessee is not possible as called for by the authorities below. In such an event, having cash in hand with the assessee cannot be ruled-out altogether. Under these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the impugned cannot be warranted and the entire addition is deleted. I hold and direct accordingly. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. 4 ITA.No.207/NAG./2024 Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.01.2025. Sd/- (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur, Dated 28th January, 2025 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Nagpur concerned 4. The CIT, Nagpur concerned 5. The D.R. ITAT, Nagpur SMC-Bench, Nagpur 6. Guard File. //By Order// True Copy Sr. Private Secretary : ITAT : Nagpur Bench NAGPUR. "