IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ms. Jayashree Sanjay ACIT, Circle 42(2)(3), Jadhav, Kautalya Bhavan, Bandra H 11/703, Palm Acres CHS Ltd. Vs. Kurla Complex, Pratiksha Nagar, Sion, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400022. Mumbai - 400051 PAN: ADGPJ9973J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Present for:

Assessee by : Shri Anant Pai, Ld. A.R.

Revenue by : Shri Vikas Chandra, Ld. Sr. D.R.

Date of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025

O R D E R

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 31.07.2025, impugned herein, passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ADDL/JCIT (A) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2008-09.

2. Admittedly, the case of the Assessee was selected for scrutiny for the following issues:

(i) cash deposit in the bank account during demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016.

(ii) transactions made in immovable property and (iii) investment of Rs.1,50,000/- u/s 80C.

However, the assessment proceedings resulted in passing the order dated 24.12.2019 u/s 143(3) and making the addition of Rs.15,04,500/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of amount deposited by the Assessee in its bank account.

3. The Assessee though being aggrieved challenged the said addition by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however, did not get any relief as the Ld. Commissioner vide impugned order affirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal. Thus, the Assessee being aggrieved has challenged the aforesaid addition.

4. Having heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, the authorities below were empowered to examine the cash deposits made during the period from 09.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 only, as the case was selected for limited scrutiny of the issues mentioned above and was not converted complete scrutiny. However, the AO still made the addition of Rs.15,04,500/- by considering the deposit made even outside the purview of the demonetization period and thus, this court is inclined to delete the addition under consideration, however, subject to verification by the 31.12.2016 only. The AO is thus directed to restrict the addition to demonetization period only.

5. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed in the said terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.11.2025.

(NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY)

JUDICIAL MEMBER * Kishore, Sr. P.S.

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench //True Copy//

By Order Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.