Trupti Shukla Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
ITAT Raipur Deletes Sec 69A Addition – Cash Deposits in Joint Account Cannot Be Taxed in Wife’s Hands When Husband Owns the Money
In Trupti Shukla vs ITO (AY 2017-18), the ITAT Raipur allowed the assessee’s appeal and deleted addition of ₹52.24 lakh made u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE on cash deposits in a joint bank account. The assessee, a school teacher, explained that deposits were made by her husband — a separate taxpayer — from business receipts and past savings, and supporting declarations, ITRs and bank statements were furnished
The Tribunal observed that joint holding of a bank account does not create presumption of ownership of funds. Since the husband had owned the deposits through written declaration and the Revenue neither cross-examined him nor brought contrary material, invoking sec 69A in the wife’s hands was unjustified. ITAT relied on principles laid down in Mehta Parikh & Co. that uncontroverted affidavits must be accepted and cannot be rejected merely on suspicion
Further, ITAT held that section 69A is a deeming fiction to be applied only where ownership is established. Once the real owner was identified and explanation was supported by evidence, addition in the hands of a joint holder was unsustainable. Accordingly, the entire addition was directed to be deleted and the appeal was allowed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT RAIPUR
The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, dated 28.05.2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 as per the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.55,24,000/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer.
2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in confirming action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in applying section 69A on the cash deposited of Rs.55,24,000/-and charging the same to higher rate of tax under section 115BBE of the Act.
3. The appellant reserves the right to addition, alter or omit all or any of the grounds of appeal in the interest of justice.”
2. Brief facts in this case are that this is a case where the wife (assessee) and her husband is having a joint account in the bank. During relevant year, there was cash deposits made in the said bank account which was added by the department u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee. But the fact of the matter is that as explained by the assessee before the Department that such money deposited was by her husband in the joint account belonging jointly of the assessee and her husband. The Revenue authorities had made the addition without cross examination of husband of the assessee nor had enquired in the genuineness of the statements and written submissions filed by the assessee and the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had not passed the order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act.
