VIKRAM NARENDRA PATIL,AURANGABAD V. ITO WARD - 1(2), AURANGABAD

ITA 950/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vikram Narendra Patil, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which confirmed an addition of Rs.10.00 lakh to his income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (AO) following the detection of unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The CIT(A) had partially relieved the assessee by deleting Rs.4.50 lakh from the addition. The Tribunal examined the sources of the remaining Rs.10.00 lakh, which included a claimed cash gift from the assessee's deceased grandmother, and other personal income sources. The Tribunal found the evidence for the cash gift insufficient but accepted other sources as partially explaining the cash deposit.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772169 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK KUMAR KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAYAG JHA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Salary income; Gift
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vikram Narendra Patil A-20/4, 11th Scheme, Near Siddhivinayak Mandir, Shivaji Nagar, Garkheda, Aurangabad - 431009, Maharashtra PAN: BYQPP3325J Vs. ITO, Ward-1(12), Aurangabad, Maharshtra. Now presently Ward-1(5), Aurangabad Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 18.10.2023 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 18.12.2019 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 477 days in preferring the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay in filing of the appeal. Main reason for the delay is that the assessee is not well versed with the provisions of income-tax with regard to filing of the appeal before the Tribunal and since he was dependent on the legal advice of the counsel, Appellant by : Shri Prayag Jha Respondent by : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia Date of hearing : 08.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 26.08.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Vikram Narendra Patil 2 delay has arisen on account of searching for a proper counsel for filing the appeal. 3. After hearing both the sides and perusing the averments made in the affidavit, I am satisfied that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the stipulated time. I note that the assessee has not gained from filing the appeal with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 477 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The only grievance of the assessee is twofold, firstly that no valid notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act has been issued and secondly that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.10.00 lakh u/s.69A of the Act by not accepting the cash gift received by the assessee on 17.10.2016 from her deceased grandmother. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and income of Rs.3,19,250/- declared in the return for A.Y 2017-18 e-filed on 05.08.2017. On the basis of information of the cash deposit during the demonetization period, assessee’s case selected for Limited Scrutiny under CASS. As per Ld. AO valid notice u/s.143(2) of the Act issued on 04.09.2018 and duly served upon the assessee through electronic mail followed by validly serving u/s.142(1) of the Act. Ld. AO observed that assessee has deposited Rs.14.50 lakh during the demonetization period. Assessee made Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Vikram Narendra Patil 3 submissions stating that source of deposit is opening cash balance, cash withdrawals from bank, income earned during the year and the cash gift of Rs.10.00 lakh received from grandmother on 17.10.2016. However, ld. AO was not satisfied and made addition of Rs.14.50 lakh u/s.69A of the Act assessing the income at 17,69,250/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal and reiterated the submissions made before ld. AO. However, Ld. CIT(A) gave part relief deleting the addition of Rs.4.50 lakh and confirmed the remaining addition of Rs.10.00 lakh. 6. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the sustenance of addition of Rs.10.00 lakh by ld.CIT(A). 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to paper book running into 31 pages and stated that valid cash gift was received by the assessee and now at this stage how the assessee can prove the genuineness of cash gift because the donor has already expired. He also mentioned that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the other source of cash held with the assessee including opening cash balance, cash withdrawals and income declared in the ITR. 8. On the other hand, Ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the order of ld. CIT(A). 9. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Assessee is aggrieved with addition of Rs.10.00 lakh sustained by ld. CIT(A). Initially the addition was made by the Ld. AO towards unexplained cash deposit at Rs.14.50 lakh. Thereafter, Ld. CIT(A) gave part relief and deleted the addition of Rs.4.50 lakh. Now the source of remaining cash deposit of Rs.10.00 lakh needs to be Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Vikram Narendra Patil 4 examined. One of the sources stated by the assessee is the cash gift of Rs.10.00 lakh received from his grandmother. I note that prior to announcement of the demonetization scheme, assessee has claimed to have received cash gift from his grandmother Bhagirathibai Ramdas Patil. In support of the same, gift deed on stamp paper of Rupees Hundred has been filed which is placed at paper book page no. 1. There is only a thumb impression of the deceased grandmother of the assessee who has subsequently expired on 17.02.2017. The gift deed is not notarized and there is no witness on the gift deed. I note that the gift has been given by Bhagirathibai Ramdas Patil to her nephew i.e the assessee. Evidence placed before me is not sufficient to prove the genuineness of the cash gift and the creditworthiness of the deceased to have possessed sufficient funds including the cash gift. Therefore, the source of alleged cash deposit from the cash gift received from assesse’s grandmother cannot be accepted. Finding of Ld. CIT(A) disbelieving the claim of the assessee stands confirmed. 10. I further notice that in the receipt and payment account assessee has mentioned that he was having opening cash balance of Rs.6,45,461/- and apart from cash withdrawals the assessee had also had source of cash from salary income at Rs.1.20 lakh and other income at Rs.3,29,988/-. Though the ld. CIT(A) has given relief of Rs.4.50 lakh but still the assessee has filed the details for the other source of cash available with him which cannot be disbelieved. Even some portion of cash available with the assessee is applied for the household expenses still I am of the considered view that part from the soure of Rs. 4.50 lac available with the assessee accepted by Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Vikram Narendra Patil 5 Ld. CIT(A) assessee also had availability of cash at Rs.5.00 lakh from the opening cash in hand, cash withdrawals from bank and the income earned during the year and other gifts received from family and relatives below the threshold limit of Rs.50,000/-. I according delete the addition of Rs.5.00 lakh as against Rs.10.00 lakh sustained by ld. CIT(A) giving part relief to the assessee. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is partly allowed. 11. So far as the legal ground raised by the assessee about non service of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act, during the course of hearing before me no submissions were made by ld. Counsel for the assessee on this issue by placing any evidence. It is also observed that in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee has himself mentioned that notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were properly served to the assessee through electronic mail. Therefore this legal issue raised by the assessee is hereby dismissed. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 26th day of August, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 26th August, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.950/PUN/2025 Vikram Narendra Patil 6 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "