ITA No.2662/Del/2024

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the Assessing Officer (AO) had information regarding a deposit of cash of INR 14,75,000/- by the assessee during the demonetization period in the account held with Oriental Bank of Commerce, Green Park Branch. The AO issued a notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, calling upon the assessee to file his return of income for the relevant year. The case was taken up for scrutiny, and during the assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cash was deposited out of cash sales by the assessee. The AO did not accept the explanation offered by the assessee and proceeded to make an addition of the amount deposited in the account of the assessee. The AO assessed the income of the assessee at INR 14,93,220/- under section 144 of the Act vide assessment order dated 24.12.2019 against the disclosed income of INR 1,32,220/-.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the determination of income made by the Assessing Officer.
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding an addition made of Rs. 13,61,000/- representing alleged unexplained cash deposits.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• VED PRAKASH VS. ITO, WARD 3, REWARI HARYANA

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Shree Vagad Visha Oswal Chovisi Mahajan Charitable Trust Vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax-II(2), Mumbai

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2010-11Allowed

• Nafe Singh Shokeen vs. ITO Ward 34(6), Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Sanjeev Bhardwaj vs ACIT

  Delhi "A" Bench: New Delhi benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Mangat Ram vs ITO

  Delhi bench

• Income Tax Officer, Ward-51(5), Delhi vs. Vipin Mittal

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed