VISHAL SURYAKANT MALVANKAR,SINDHUDURG V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RATNAGIRI

ITA 1104/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vishal Suryakant Malvankar, who appealed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-2 Chennai, which was passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal pertained to the assessment year 2017-18 and challenged the addition of Rs.3.50 lakh to his income, which was alleged to be an excess investment during the demonetization period. The Tribunal examined the source of a cash deposit of Rs.3.50 lakh, claimed by the assessee to be from cash sales made after November 8, 2016, in specified bank notes. The Departmental Representative contested the legitimacy of these deposits post-demonetization. The Tribunal's decision partially favored the assessee, allowing relief for Rs.2,02,900 but confirming the addition of Rs.1,47,100.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712420 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK KUMAR KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S SHINGTE

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1104/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vishal Suryakant Malvankar At Nemale Gawade Wadi Post Nemale, Sawantwadi, Sindhudurg - 416510, Maharashtra PAN: ALKPM6593R Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ratnagiri Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 18.03.2025 of Addl/JCIT(A)-2 Chennai passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 19.12.2019 passed u/s.144(3) of the Act. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is against the addition of Rs.3.50 lakh made by the Assessing Officer for excess of the investment during demonetization period. 3. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the source of cash deposit of Rs.3.50 lakh is from the cash sales made after 08.11.2016 and the amount was received in the specified bank notes (SBN). On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that even though not Appellant by : Shri Pramod S Shingte Respondent by : Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia Date of hearing : 08.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1104/PUN/2025 Vishal Suryakant Malvankar 2 authorised to receive SBNs after 08.11.2016 still assessee has received the alleged sum. 4. Admittedly, assessee maintains regular books and consistently makes Cash Sales. Even ld. Assessing Officer has not doubted the cash sales made during the year except for demonetization period. It thus proves that cash sales have been effected against SBNs. But, even if for the sake of argument, it is considered that cash of Rs.3.5 lakh is from the cash sales then also if we take the basis of Cash Book filed by assessee then during the period of demonetization period from 08.11.2016 to the date of alleged cash deposit, cash sales are only to the extent of Rs.2,02,900/-. This fact indicated by the ld. Departmental Representative could not be rebutted by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. 5. Under these given facts and circumstances, I find that the assessee has been able to explain the source of alleged cash deposit from cash sales only to the extent of Rs.2,02,900/- and the remaining amount of Rs.1,47,100/- deserves to be added in the hands of assessee. Addition confirmed by ld. CIT(A) is sustained to the extent to Rs.1,47,100/-. The assessee gets part relief. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced on this 28th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 28th July, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1104/PUN/2025 Vishal Suryakant Malvankar 3 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 "