ITAT Mumbai Upholds Rs 2.60 Lakh Addition After Rejecting Unsupported Cash Deposit Explanation:

The ITAT partly allowed an appeal by granting relief of Rs 2 lakh while sustaining Rs 2.60 lakh addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash deposits.
ITAT Grants Partial Relief In Rs 4.60 Lakh Cash Deposit Addition

ITAT Mumbai Upholds Rs 2.60 Lakh Addition After Rejecting Unsupported Cash Deposit Explanation
The ITAT Mumbai partly allowed the appeal filed by taxpayer Kavish Dilip Kumar Solanki regarding an addition made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for unexplained cash deposits.
The assessee had filed his income tax return for Assessment Year 2018-19 declaring a total income of Rs 5.65 lakh. During scrutiny, the Assessing Officer noticed cash deposits of Rs 4.60 lakh in the assessee’s bank account between June 19 and June 28, 2017. The assessee initially explained that the deposits came from past savings, gifts from relatives, and repayment of loans given to friends and family members. However, no supporting documents were submitted before the tax authorities.
The Assessing Officer treated the entire amount as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 and added it to the assessee’s income. Though the CIT(A) deleted another addition relating to property valuation differences, it confirmed the addition of Rs 4.60 lakh due to lack of evidence.
Before the ITAT, the assessee changed his explanation and claimed that the cash came from labour charges earned from gold ornament work during April and May 2017. A cash generation statement was also submitted. However, the Tribunal observed that the assessee still failed to provide proper supporting documents for such income.
After considering the facts, the ITAT held that it would be reasonable to presume that the assessee had a cash balance of Rs. 2 lakh available with him. Accordingly, the Tribunal granted relief of Rs 2 lakh and sustained the remaining addition of Rs 2.60 lakh under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2420My Recent Articles
- Bona Fide Mistake in ITR Cannot Deny Section 10(10B) Exemption on BSNL VRS Compensation, Holds ITATPremium
- ITAT Grants Taxpayer a Final Opportunity to Explain Rs 2.27 Crore Cash Deposits Under Section 69APremium
- ITAT Restores Appeals for Fresh Consideration After NFAC Denied Request of Personal Hearing Through Video ConferencingPremium
- ITAT Condones 97-Day Delay, Restores Appeal After CIT(A) Sent Hearing Notices to Wrong Email AddressPremium
- MCA Appoints Justice (Retd.) Yogesh Khanna as Officiating Chairperson of NCLAT for Three Months
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








