Subhash Chander vs Income Tax Officer

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ Addl/JCIT(A) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Panchkula’s order dated 14.06.2024 passed in DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1065668365(1), 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.

Delay of 681 days in filing of assessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Next comes the sole substantive issue between the parties. The assessee/appellant had admittedly deposited cash of Rs. 64.64 lakhs in the relevant previous year during demonetization. He appears to have claimed source thereof to his agricultural incme as well as his new venture in dairy sector. There is further no dispute that both the learned lower authorities have disallowed/added the said cash deposits to the extent of 10% only after admitting his entire foregoing explanation. This is what forms the sole substantive issue for the tribunal’s apt adjudication herein.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and the Revenue’s respective submissions. I find no reason to sustain the impugned addition once both the learned lower authorities have already accepted the assessee’s agricultural income and dairy sales receipts in lower proceedings. Deleted accordingly.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed.