Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 02 ITAT CK 3432

Sh. Pawan Kumar Laur vs Income Tax Officer

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 9 February 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, J
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.154/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 · 290 words

ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2022-23, 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/250/2025-26/1083072449(1), dated 27.11.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment and lower appellate discussion/findings dated 06.03.2024 and 27.11.2025 have held the assessee’s cash deposits in the relevant previous year to the tune of Rs.32.20 lakhs as unexplained under section 69A of the Act which forms the sole substantive issue of adjudication in the instant appeal. Both the parties vehemently reiterate their respective stands against and in support of the impugned addition. Learned counsel has invited the tribunal’s attention to the assessee’s twin bank accounts cash flows wherein he is stated to have withdrawn Rs.38.25 lakhs in FY 2020-21 from SBI bank account and again Rs.8.85 lakhs in the relevant previous year. His case therefore is that the impugned cash deposits of Rs.32.20 lakhs represent his previous cash withdrawals only which have not been successfully proved to the entire satisfaction of both the lower authorities.

3.

Be that as it may, this tribunal sees only a part merit in the assessee’s case going by his previous withdrawals and his impugned cash deposits. It is thus deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice that a lumpsum addition of Rs.2.20 lakhs in the hands of the assessee is deemed just and proper with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets relief of Rs.30 lakhs in other words.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed.