Shaik Abdul Zilani vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shaik Abdul Zilani, filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2021-22 on 21.12.2021, declaring an income of Rs. 4,86,810/-. His case was selected for complete scrutiny to verify large cash deposits in his bank accounts and properties purchased/sold during the year. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had made cash deposits in his three bank accounts aggregating to Rs. 40,33,500/-. The assessee provided explanations for the sources of these deposits, including cash received from his father, savings of his wife, and other sources. However, the Assessing Officer did not accept the explanations and treated the deposits as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partly accepted the assessee's explanation but sustained the rejection of the sources of the cash deposits to the extent of Rs. 14,50,000/-. The assessee appealed against this order.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and law applicable to the case.
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in partly sustaining Rs. 14,50,000/- out of the total addition of Rs. 40,33,500/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A of the Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Ranjeet Singh Vs. ITO, Ward-5(5), Patna

  Patna Bench at Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Shri Pandian Hari Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 11(4), Chennai

• Sikha Datta vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer

  SMC Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Kiran Agarwal Vs. ITO, Ward-46(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2021-22Partly Allowed

• Kamal Gupta Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Sanjay Kumar Saini vs ITO, Ward -2, Jhunjhunu

  Jaipur bench