Rajinder Kaur vs Income Tax Officer

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2021-22, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2026-27/1088737902(1), dated 30.04.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

The assessee/appellant herein in the instant appeal raises her sole substantive ground that both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate findings have erred in law and on facts in treating her cash deposits amounting to Rs. 21.50 lakhs as unexplained forming subject matter of addition u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s as well as the Revenue’s respective pleadings. The Revenue could hardly dispute that even the learned Assessing Officer has fairly concluded at page 6 of the assessment order dated 15.12.2022 that the assessee had withdrawn total cash of Rs. 21.50 lakhs from her various books of accounts. That being the case faced with this situation, the fact also remains that the assessee could not plead and prove the necessary reconciliation and verification of her preceding cash withdrawals followed by redeposits amounting to Rs. 21.5 lakhs in the entire satisfaction of the learned lower authorities’ findings. It is thus deem appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lumpsump addition of Rs. 1 lakh only in the assessee’s hands would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as precedent. The assessee is granted relief of Rs. 20.50 lakh in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.