Shri Gyan Chand Tatiya Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Shri Gyan Chand Tatiya filed an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 30.04.2024, which arose from the order passed by the A.O under Sec.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 27.12.2019 for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee had made cash deposits in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) during the demonetization period. The A.O treated cash deposits of Rs.33,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 despite the assessee's explanation. The assessee appealed against this decision, arguing that the A.O erred in treating the cash deposit as unexplained. The CIT(Appeals) upheld the A.O's decision, and the assessee appealed to the ITAT.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the cash deposit of Rs.33,00,000/- made by the assessee during the demonetization period is an unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act.
• 2. Whether the A.O erred in recording the statement of the assessee u/s. 131 of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Gajalaxmi Pharma vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Chennai bench

• M/s. Appa Trading Company Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Salem

  Chennai bench

• Shakti Sales Corporation Vs ITO, Ward-27(3)(1), Mumbai

• M/s. Gariahat Market Byabasayee Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. v. ITO, Ward-30(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata bench

• Sridharpur Co-Operative Bank Vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Burdwan

  Kolkata ‘C’ Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Rajesh Kumar Dalmia Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed