Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 06 ITAT CK 1608

Sanjay Kumar Raul vs Income Tax Officer Ward 54(4)

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 25 June 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vikas Awasthy, J
CASE NUMBER
ITA 1740/DEL/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 322 words

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 01.01.2026, for Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

Shri M P Rastogi, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is engaged in providing tiffin services for the last several years. The addition of Rs.14,27,710/- in the impugned assessment year has been made by the Assessing Officer (AO) by considering credits only in the bank account, without considering debits/withdrawals. The small savings of the assessee were rotated in the bank account of the assessee by way of deposits and withdrawals. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) granted part relief to the extent income disclosed in the return of income by the assessee and restricted the addition to Rs.12,07,710/-. The Id. Counsel prayed for deleting the addition. Without prejudice, the Id. Counsel stated that the addition can be restricted to peak credit after giving the benefit of cash in hand.

3.

Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department strongly supported findings of the CIT(A). The ld. DR submits that the CIT(A) has restricted the addition to Rs.12,07,710/-, the order of CIT(A) is reasonable and fair, therefore, the same be confirmed.

4.

Both sides heard, orders of the lower authorities examined. The AO has made addition of Rs.14,27,710/- only by considering credits in the bank account without considering withdrawals/debits. The CIT(A) has restricted the addition to Rs.12,07,710/-. Considering entire facts of the case, I agree with the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the AO has erred in making addition of entire credits in the bank account ignoring debits. To meet the ends of justice, the addition can be restricted to peak credit in the bank account. The AO is directed to pass fresh assessment order, accordingly.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.