Sunita Sherwani v. ITO (2025) 177 taxmann.com 437/ 347 CTR 408 / 255 DTR 161 (Chattisgarh)(HC)

S. 69A : Unexplained money-Income form undisclosed sources—Cash deposits in bank account-Demonetisation period—Bank account statement of last three financial years and return of her income for last six financial years-Allowing the appeal the Court held that the Assessing Officer ought to have been verified in terms of clauses 1.1 and 1.3 of CBDT Circular No. 3, dated 21-2-2017 before making addition,-Matter was remitted back to Assessing Officer to conduct verification and pass an order afresh. [S. 254(1), 260A]

Assessing Officer made addition of entire cash amount deposited in the bank treating it as unexplained money under section 69A. Tribunal relying upon CBDT Circular No. 3/2017, dated 21-2-2017, held that assessee would have been in possession of cash in hand of Rs. 3.50 lakhs at relevant point of time and after deducting said amount, sustained addition of Rs. 7.50 lakhs with her income. On appeal the Court held that  since assessee had submitted her bank account statement of last three financial years and return of her income for last six financial years, it ought to have been verified in terms of clause 1.1 and 1.3 of CBDT Circular No. 3/2017, dated 21-2-2017, which was not carried out by either of authorities and straightway an amount of Rs. 7.50 lakhs had been added to income of assessee on account of unexplained money under section 69A, which was unsustainable and bad in law. Accordingly the addition was set aside and matter was to be remitted back to Assessing Officer to conduct verification and pass an order afresh in terms of clauses 1.1 and 1.3 of aforesaid Circular to extent of addition of Rs. 7.50 lakhs with income of assessee.  (AY. 2017-18)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*