TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal granted, Rs. 7,00,000 addition under IT Act section 69A deleted. Appellant explained funds source.</h1> <h3>Vardhan Ghildiyal Versus Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1 (2) (5), Dehradun</h3> Vardhan Ghildiyal Versus Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1 (2) (5), Dehradun - [2022] 194 ITD 689 (ITAT [Del]) Issues:1. Addition under section 69A of the IT Act, 1961 based on mismatch of denominations during cash deposit.2. Confirmation of the addition by the CIT(A) despite no doubt on the source of cash deposit.3. Allegations of conjecture and surmises in the decision of the CIT(A).4. Discrepancy in the decision of the CIT(A) regarding the allowance for past savings and denomination mixing.Analysis:Issue 1:The assessee appealed against the addition under section 69A of the IT Act, 1961, due to a mismatch of denominations during cash deposit. The AO invoked Section 69A based on this discrepancy, adding Rs. 7,00,000 to the income. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, reducing the addition to Rs. 3,50,000, considering past savings and the mixing of note denominations.Issue 2:The CIT(A) confirmed the addition under section 69A despite no doubt on the source of cash deposit. The appellant argued that the change in denomination should not lead to income generation and invoked RBI circulars to support the claim. The Ld. AR contended that the source of income was not in question, and the partial allowance by the CIT(A) was unwarranted.Issue 3:The appellant raised concerns about conjecture and surmises in the CIT(A)'s decision, alleging ignorance of submitted evidence and arbitrary conclusions. The CIT(A) allowed a partial deduction based on the mixing of notes and past savings, leading to a reduction in the addition. The appellant sought the deletion of the remaining addition.Issue 4:The CIT(A) decision faced scrutiny for discrepancies in allowing deductions for past savings and denomination mixing. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) based its decision on conjecture and surmises, leading to an arbitrary conclusion. The Tribunal considered the interconnected grounds raised by the appellant and found merit in the arguments presented.In the final judgment, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the deletion of the complete addition of Rs. 7,00,000 made under section 69A of the IT Act. The Tribunal found that the appellant had successfully explained the source of the deposited funds, leading to the decision to overturn the CIT(A)'s confirmation of the addition.
TaxTMI 