Meenakshi Sawhney vs ACIT, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon

PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM:

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.01.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi-26 [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 24.12.2019 passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-16, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. AO’) under Section 143(3) of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

An addition of Rs.9 lakhs is the subject matter before us which was made under Section 68 of the Act r.w.s 115BBA on account of unexplained cash deposit; the same has been challenged as passed only on surmise and conjectures and also violative of principles of natural justice as the crux of the submission made by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee before us.

The fact of the case is that the cash was deposited by the assessee in old currency on 16.11.2016 in the Canara Bank account maintained by the assessee. The assessee and her husband are senior citizens suffering from chronic heard diseases and in order to meet any contingency which may arise on account of any medical reasons, cash was kept with them as the case made out by the assessee which was further submitted by the Ld. Counsel Mr. Baldev Raj appearing for the assessee. The details of cash withdrawals by the assessee and her husband have duly been placed before the authorities below. As the husband has not been found to have deposited any cash in specified note post demonetization, the assessee being the only lady in the house was found to be responsible for cash maintained for house expenses and other contingencies. Apart from medical grounds, considering the age of the assessee and her husband the cash has been kept with the assessee which is prayed to be considered by the Ld. AR before us.

The Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the authorities below.

Under the facts and circumstances of the matter, once the guidelines have been framed by the financial authorities, the assessee did not have any other alternative, but, to deposit the cash in the bank the source whereof has duly been furnished by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) by making an application under Rule 46A of the IT(AT) Rules as additional evidences appearing at pages 96 and 97 of the paper book filed before us. However, the same was not allowed by the Ld.CIT(A), hence, the instant appeal before us.

We have considered the application as aforesaid and the contents thereof showing the sufficient cause preventing the assessee from producing the same before the Ld. AO which is found to be genuine and, therefore, we allow this application keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned therein.

The additional evidences particularly the medical reports before us so submitted by the assessee along with the certificate-cum-declaration given by the husband of the assessee appearing at page 107 of the paper book has also duly been considered by us, the contents whereof is found to be acceptable having regard to the medical conditions of both the husband and wife, house expenses which were claimed to have been part of withdrawals and kept with the assessee as detailed before us. The addition is found to be not sustainable and, thus, deleted.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.