AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order dated 08.04.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida.
In this case, on account of a search in the case of M/s Uflex-Montage Group of cases on 21.02.2023, where the assessee was also covered, cash of Rs.7,26,600/- was found at the assessee’s premises. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee stated that he was living in a joint family and the said cash was accumulated over a period of time by all the family members. The explanation provided by the assessee is seen to be recorded in para 6 at page 3 of the Ld. AO’s order. However, the Ld. AO disbelieved the assessee’s contention and added this amount u/s 69A of the Act.
The assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where he made the same statements as before the AO. The Ld. CIT(A) has recorded on pages 8 & 9 of the impugned order that some benefit needed to be given to the assessee on account of past savings and money obtained as “streedhan”. Thereby a benefit of Rs.4,00,000/- was given but the remainder of Rs.3,26,600/- was confirmed as an addition.
The aggrieved assessee has now approached the ITAT with grounds challenging this action of Ld. CIT(A).
Before us the Ld. AR argued with the help of a paper book and written submissions. It was stated that the assessee had diligently filed details about ownership of cash vis-à-vis each family member. It was stated that the assessee was filing his return of income after disclosing substantial receipts and for this year the return of income was filed at Rs.1,23,58,650/-. It was the further submission that the entire cash found was attributable to the assessee’s daughter, wife and father, along with some cash on his own account. It was the submission that the entire cash was justified and explained. It was the further submission that the reasoning given in the impugned order for granting relief of Rs.4,00,000/-was actually good enough to grant full relief. The assessee relied on several coordinate bench orders in support of his arguments.
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and have gone through the documents before us. It is seen from a close reading of the orders of authorities below that the assessee has been relying on possible explanations for the cash found. We find that the assessee’s contentions are not really backed by any documents etc. However, it is felt that an assessee of substantial means, who is also filing a return of income showing substantial income, would have some cash out of past savings. The fact that the father of the assessee, his daughter and his family are also staying in the same house, inclines us to the view that substantial portion of the cash would be justified. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is felt that the confirmation of addition of Rs. 50,000/- would meet the ends of justice. The assessee would get consequential relief.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed.