Rahul Bansal (HUF) vs. ITO, Ward 59 (6)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Rahul Bansal (HUF), is in the business of manufacturing and retail selling of jewelry. During the assessment year 2017-18, the assessee deposited cash in their bank accounts during the demonetization period (October to December) to the extent of Rs. 102,50,000/- and Rs. 52,00,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and the Assessing Officer (AO) treated the cash deposits as unexplained investments under section 69/69A of the Act. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and subsequently to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether treating Rs.15450000/- as 'Unexplained Money' in terms of section 69A is arbitrary, unjust & illegal.
• 2. Whether the addition made at Rs.15450000/- u/s 69A is liable to be deleted.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ITA No. 955/Del/2024

  Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• RAHUL JAIN VS. ITO, WARD 59(8), NEW DELHI

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Purnima Priyadarshi Vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Biharsharif

  Patna Bench at Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Govardha Naidu Chintakunta vs. ITO, Ward-1

  Hyderabad bench

• ITA No. 3555/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18

  Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Naem Khan Vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘E’ New Delhi benchAY 2011-12Dismissed