The appeal ITA No. 1690/DEL/2019 involves appellant Sunil Kumar from Hapur, Uttar Pradesh, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5), Hapur. This case pertains to the assessment year 2009-10, focusing on a significant cash deposit issue.
Sunil Kumar, through his appeal, contests the CIT(A) Muzaffarnagar’s decision dated 31.12.2018 which confirmed the Assessing Officer’s addition of Rs. 40.35 lacs as unexplained cash deposits. The legal heir argued that this amount was incorrectly attributed to him, stemming from cash deposits made by his deceased father from the sale of land.
The hearing, which occurred on October 11, 2022, proceeded exparte due to the absence of the appellant despite multiple notices. The Departmental Representative (DR) presented the case extensively, leading to a careful review of the records and earlier hearings.
The tribunal, led by Sh. N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member, analyzed the cash deposits in question and the source as explained by the appellant. It was established that the actual share from the land sale relevant to the appellant was significantly lower than the deposited amount, and transactions were primarily conducted through banking channels.
The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)’s decision, dismissing the appeal based on the findings that the explanations provided did not justify the large sum of cash deposited under the appellant’s account. This case emphasizes the importance of proper documentation and explanation of income sources in tax assessments.
Detailed Review of ITA No. 1690/DEL/2019: Sunil Kumar vs ITO, Ward-3(5), Hapur
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform