Sayibbi Shaik Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
Visakhapatnam ITAT Restores ₹80.66-Lakh Bank Deposit Additions: Housewife Given Fresh Opportunity to Prove Cash Recycling, Spousal Gift and FD Renewal
The Visakhapatnam ITAT restored to the AO the additions concerning cash deposits of ₹54.16 lakh, a ₹10-lakh fixed deposit, and the CIT(A)’s enhancement of ₹16.50 lakh. The assessee, a housewife, contended that ₹46.57 lakh of the cash deposits arose from earlier withdrawals from the same bank accounts, while the balance represented amounts received from her husband and agricultural receipts. She also claimed that the ₹10-lakh fixed deposit was merely a renewal of an earlier deposit, and not a fresh investment during the relevant year.
The Tribunal observed that the assessee had made only a bald assertion before the AO without sufficient supporting evidence and had failed to participate in the appellate proceedings despite several notices, resulting in an ex parte order by the CIT(A). Nevertheless, considering her claim that the deposits could be reconciled through earlier withdrawals and that she had not received an effective opportunity to establish the sources, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to grant one final opportunity.
Accordingly, the CIT(A)’s order was set aside and the entire matter was restored to the AO for de novo adjudication. The assessee was directed to produce supporting evidence, including a proper cash-flow statement, bank records, evidence concerning amounts received from her husband and proof that the fixed deposit was only a renewal. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
List of Cases Discussed / Relied Upon
- Smt. Prameela Pasumarthi Vs DCIT,(2025) 146 TLC 365; (2025) 180 taxmann.com 131 — cited in the assessee’s ground concerning issuance of reassessment notices by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer under the faceless mechanism.
- Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs ITO,(2023) 156 taxmann.com 178 (Telangana) — cited in the assessee’s ground concerning jurisdiction of the JAO to issue reassessment notices under Section 151A.
- Sanath Kumar Murali Vs. Income-tax Officer,[2023] 152 taxmann.com 231 (Karnataka); [2023] 294 Taxman 80 (Karnataka); [2023] 455 ITR 370 (Karnataka) — cited in support of the contention concerning quantification of income chargeable to tax for reassessment under Section 149.
- GKN Drive Shaft (India) Ltd. vs ITO,259 ITR 19 (SC) — cited in the assessee’s grounds concerning supply of material/reasons and procedural requirements in reassessment proceedings.
- Kolakaluru Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited vs ITO,(2025) ITA No.456/Viz/2025 dated 05/12/2025 — cited in the assessee’s ground concerning issuance of reassessment notices by the JAO/FAO.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
