VEDPRAKASH UTTAM,KANPUR NAGAR V. AO, KANPUR

ITA 246/LKW/2025

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785966 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.R.N. SHUKLA
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.246/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.246/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 Ved Prakash Uttam H.No. 29B Krishna Nagar, New Azad Nagar, PO Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur-208011 PAN:AAMPU6506H Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1)(1), Kanpur. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.246/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 against impugned appellate order dated 30/01/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1072743055(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. (B) In this case assessment order was passed u/s 147 of the I. T. Act whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.12,78,820/- as against returned income of Rs.2,08,822/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, an addition of Rs.10,70,000/- was made on account of cash deposited in the bank. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was partly allowed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated Appellant by None Respondent by Shri R.R.N. Shukla, Addl. CIT (D.R.) Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.246/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 2 30/01/2025. Relevant portion of the order of the learned CIT(A) is reproduced as under: (C) At the time of hearing, learned Departmental Representative relied on order of learned CIT(A). As can be readily seen, the learned CIT(A) deleted 50% of the aforesaid addition of Rs.10,70,000/- and sustained the remaining 50% amounting to Rs.5,35,050/-. The learned CIT(A) has accepted the assessee’s explanation that the assessee, an ex-service man, was not a well placed person economically and it is quite probable that he borrowed money for emergency i.e. for the treatment of illness of his father. However, in a summary and ad hoc manner, without explaining any reason for this, the learned CIT(A) has sustained the 50% of the amount claimed by the assessee to have been received as loan for meeting emergency expenses towards treatment of his father suffering from illness. The amount of Rs.10,70,100/- claimed by the assessee to have been received for treatment of his father suffering from illness is not unreasonably high or excessive amount having regard to the cost of medical treatment in the present day, specially having regard to the circumstances of the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.246/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 3 Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition of Rs.5,35,050/-, which the learned CIT(A) had sustained in his impugned appellate order. In effect the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the entire amount of addition of Rs.10,70,100/-. (D) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. (Order pronounced in the open court on 31/10/2025) Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Dated:31/10/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T. Printed from counselvise.com "