By Advocate Karan Dua | Vintage Litigation, New Delhi | Published: October 2026
Introduction
Bank transactions in maintenance cases can provide important evidence about a spouse’s financial position, but every credit appearing in a bank account cannot automatically be treated as income.
A bank statement records the movement of money. Credits may represent salary, business receipts, loans, refunds, reimbursements, transfers between accounts or money received for another purpose. The nature and source of each transaction can therefore matter when a court assesses income and maintenance.
In Annu Garg v. Ashish Garg, decided by the Delhi High Court on 29 September 2026, the Court highlighted the distinction between bank transactions and actual disposable income. The decision is particularly relevant to maintenance disputes where one spouse relies on bank records to argue that the other spouse has disclosed a lower income than they actually receive.
The answer is no.
Bank Transactions in Maintenance Cases Cannot Be Treated as Income Automatically
In maintenance proceedings, financial disclosure is often one of the most contested issues.
A spouse may produce bank statements and argue that the other spouse has disclosed an artificially low income. The argument can appear persuasive when the statement contains frequent or substantial credits. However, the total amount credited into an account cannot simply be divided by twelve and presented as monthly income.
The reason is straightforward.
A bank account records the movement of money. It does not classify every transaction as salary, profit, investment income or disposable income.
For instance, a businessman may receive several lakh rupees in a month, but a substantial part of that amount may immediately be used to pay suppliers, employees, rent, taxes or other business expenses. Similarly, a person may transfer money between two accounts belonging to the same person. Counting both entries as separate income would obviously give a misleading picture.
The Delhi High Court’s September 2026 decision is important precisely because it recognises this difference between financial transactions and actual disposable income.
What Happened in Annu Garg v. Ashish Garg?
The Delhi High Court was considering a challenge to an interim maintenance order passed by the Family Court.
The Family Court had assessed the husband’s income at approximately ₹80,000 to ₹90,000 per month and had awarded the wife interim maintenance of ₹15,000 per month. The wife approached the High Court seeking enhancement and relied, among other things, upon financial material and bank transactions.
The Delhi High Court declined to interfere with the interim order.
The Court noted that maintenance cannot be determined through a rigid mathematical formula. The financial circumstances of both parties, their reasonable needs, income, assets and liabilities have to be examined as a whole.
Importantly, the Court did not accept the approach that bank transactions could automatically be equated with monthly disposable income. The nature and source of the transactions would have to be examined.
This is a significant clarification because financial disputes in matrimonial cases often become focused on the amount of money that appears in a bank statement rather than the actual financial capacity of the person.
A Bank Statement Shows Money Movement, Not Necessarily Income
The difference may appear technical, but in a maintenance case it can have a substantial financial consequence.
Imagine that a person’s bank account shows credits of ₹15 lakh during a particular year. It may be tempting to conclude that the person’s monthly income is ₹1.25 lakh.
But what if ₹5 lakh represents a business loan?
What if ₹3 lakh was transferred from another account belonging to the same person?
What if ₹2 lakh was a refund?
What if another ₹3 lakh represented business receipts that were subsequently paid to suppliers?
The bank statement would still show ₹15 lakh in credits.
But the person’s actual disposable income could be substantially lower.
This is why the source and nature of individual transactions matter.
A court dealing with maintenance cannot fairly determine income by looking only at the total money that entered an account.
This Does Not Mean Bank Statements Are Unimportant
The Delhi High Court’s ruling should not be misunderstood.
The Court did not say that bank statements have no value in maintenance cases. On the contrary, bank records can be extremely useful when they reveal financial activity that does not match the income disclosed by a spouse.
A bank statement may show regular deposits, unexplained transfers, investments, payments for property, business receipts or other financial activity that requires an explanation.
The important point is that the transaction must be understood.
Suppose a husband claims that he earns ₹50,000 per month, but his bank records show regular deposits of ₹2 lakh every month. That does not automatically establish that his income is ₹2 lakh.
But it certainly creates a question that may need to be answered.
The court can then examine the source of those deposits, the husband’s occupation, his business records, tax documents, invoices, expenses and other evidence.
In this way, a bank statement can become an important starting point for examining income without being treated as conclusive proof of disposable income.
Business Turnover Is Not Always Personal Income
The issue becomes even more important when the person is self-employed or operates a business.
A business account can show substantial turnover without the business owner personally earning the entire amount.
If ₹10 lakh enters an account, the court must be careful before treating the full ₹10 lakh as the person’s income.
A business may have substantial expenses. Goods may have to be purchased. Employees may need to be paid. Rent, transportation, taxes and other operating costs may have to be met.
The fact that money passed through the account therefore does not necessarily mean that the same amount remained available to the individual.
At the same time, simply describing every large transaction as “business turnover” is not enough.
The person making that claim may need to support it through proper financial records.
This is where income-tax returns, business accounts, GST records where applicable, invoices, expenditure records and other documents can become important.
The court has to look beyond labels and examine the actual financial position.
Can a Wife Use Her Husband’s Bank Statement to Claim Higher Maintenance?
Yes, a bank statement can be relied upon as evidence in an appropriate case.
But the stronger approach is to identify specific transactions rather than simply produce a large figure.
For example, if a bank statement shows repeated monthly credits of ₹1.5 lakh and the husband claims that he has no income apart from a salary of ₹60,000, those transactions deserve examination.
The question then becomes where the additional money came from.
If the money represents undisclosed salary, business income, rental income or another recurring source of personal income, it may become relevant to the maintenance assessment.
If, on the other hand, the credits are transfers between the husband’s own accounts, temporary loans or genuine business receipts, the position may be entirely different.
This is why a transaction-wise analysis is generally more meaningful than simply adding up all credits.
Can a Husband Argue That Bank Credits Are Not His Income?
Yes.
Where the transactions genuinely represent something other than personal income, the husband can explain their nature and source.
For example, a large amount may have been received as a loan and later repaid. Another amount may have been transferred from a savings account to a current account. A business receipt may have been immediately used to meet business expenses.
The existence of a bank entry does not prevent a spouse from explaining it.
But the explanation should ideally be supported by documents.
If a person claims that ₹5 lakh was a loan, the surrounding financial records may become relevant. If the person claims that the amount was a business receipt, business accounts and related records may help establish that position.
The court is ultimately concerned with the financial reality rather than the description attached to the transaction.
What Is the Difference Between Bank Turnover and Disposable Income?
This is one of the most important concepts arising from the Delhi High Court’s decision.
Bank turnover refers broadly to the money moving through an account.
Disposable income refers to the financial resources actually available to a person after considering the nature of the receipts and legitimate financial obligations relevant to the maintenance assessment.
The two figures can be very different.
A person running a business may have substantial turnover but comparatively modest personal income.
A salaried employee may have fewer transactions but a stable monthly salary.
An individual may also receive money from investments, rent, family members or other sources.
That is why courts cannot use the same calculation for every matrimonial dispute.
The financial circumstances of the parties have to be considered as a whole.
For a broader explanation of how courts approach maintenance, readers can also refer to our detailed guide on how courts calculate maintenance in divorce cases in India.
What About Income Affidavits in Maintenance Cases?
Income affidavits are extremely important in matrimonial litigation because they require parties to disclose their financial position.
The real evidentiary issue often arises when the affidavit does not appear to match the other financial material available before the court.
A spouse may disclose a particular income but operate multiple bank accounts or have financial transactions that appear inconsistent with that disclosure.
In such a situation, the bank statement may become important evidence.
But again, the correct approach is comparison rather than automatic calculation.
The court may compare the affidavit with bank statements, income-tax returns, salary records, property documents, business records and other evidence.
The objective is to arrive at a realistic assessment.
This also explains why a person should be extremely careful while preparing a financial affidavit. An unexplained discrepancy between a financial disclosure and bank records can seriously affect the credibility of the case.
What If Money Is Transferred Between Two Accounts?
This is a simple example of why bank transactions need context.
Suppose a person has two bank accounts.
₹2 lakh is transferred from the first account to the second.
The second account will show a ₹2 lakh credit.
If the court simply adds every credit appearing in both accounts, the same ₹2 lakh could effectively be counted twice.
The person has not earned another ₹2 lakh.
The money has merely moved.
This is why the source of a transaction is crucial.
The Delhi High Court’s emphasis on examining the nature and source of transactions is particularly relevant in cases involving multiple accounts.
What If Money Comes From Parents or Relatives?
Money received from parents or relatives also requires examination.
It could be a genuine gift. It could be a loan. It could be reimbursement. It could be financial assistance for a particular purpose.
The fact that money entered the account does not automatically establish that it is recurring income.
At the same time, if substantial financial support is regularly provided by family members and the person relies upon those resources for his lifestyle, the circumstances may still become relevant when the court assesses the overall financial position.
Again, the answer depends upon the evidence.
Does the Delhi High Court Judgment Create a Fixed Rule for Maintenance?
No.
The judgment does not create a mathematical formula under which bank transactions can either always be counted or always be ignored.
The Court reinforced the broader principle that maintenance depends upon the facts and financial circumstances of the parties.
This is consistent with the Supreme Court’s approach in Rajnesh v. Neha, where the Court laid down guidelines for financial disclosure and emphasised that maintenance determination cannot be reduced to a single rigid formula.
The court has to consider the standard of living, income, assets, liabilities, reasonable needs and other relevant circumstances.
Therefore, the amount of money visible in a bank statement is only one part of the overall financial picture.
What If a Spouse Is Hiding Income?
The distinction between bank transactions and income does not help someone who is deliberately concealing earnings.
If a person is receiving regular income through different accounts, routing money through relatives or deliberately avoiding disclosure, the court can examine the entire financial evidence.
A bank statement can be particularly useful in exposing inconsistencies.
For example, a person may claim that he has no business income while the account regularly receives payments from customers. That evidence may require a proper explanation.
Similarly, a person may disclose only salary income while receiving regular rental income or professional fees.
The answer is not to ignore the bank records.
The answer is to establish what those records actually represent.
Our existing article on how to prove that a husband is hiding income in a maintenance case can be linked here because it deals directly with this wider issue.
Can Bank Statements Be Used to Increase Interim Maintenance?
They can be relevant, but the court will still consider the procedural stage and quality of the evidence.
In Annu Garg v. Ashish Garg, the Delhi High Court was considering an interim maintenance order and found no reason to interfere with the Family Court’s assessment at that stage.
The Court also noted that the proceedings before the Family Court were continuing and that questions concerning actual income, assets, liabilities, bank transactions and reasonable expenditure could be examined on complete evidence.
This is important because an interim order does not necessarily settle every financial issue for the entire case.
Where there is a material change in circumstances or additional evidence becomes available, the appropriate legal remedy may be considered in accordance with law.
The Court preserved the wife’s liberty to seek appropriate modification in the circumstances recognised by law.
What About EMIs and Loans?
Bank transactions and loan liabilities are separate issues.
A person may have substantial credits in an account and also have significant loan repayments.
The existence of an EMI does not automatically eliminate the person’s income.
Similarly, the existence of an income credit does not automatically mean that the entire amount is available for maintenance.
The court may have to examine the purpose of the loan, the asset created through the borrowing, the actual financial circumstances and whether the liability is genuine.
The Supreme Court’s 2026 decision in Deepa Joshi v. Gaurav Joshi has separately dealt with the relevance of loan repayments while assessing maintenance.
Readers can refer to our detailed article on EMIs and maintenance after the Supreme Court’s 2026 ruling.
The two judgments therefore address related but different questions.
The Delhi High Court decision concerns whether bank transactions themselves represent disposable income.
The Supreme Court decision concerns how genuine financial liabilities and loan repayments may be considered.
Why This Ruling Matters for Delhi Matrimonial Cases
The decision is particularly relevant to maintenance litigation before Delhi Family Courts because financial disputes often involve detailed bank records and income disclosures.
A party seeking maintenance may want to establish that the other spouse has greater financial resources than disclosed.
A party opposing the claim may need to explain why certain transactions should not be treated as personal income.
Both sides therefore need to understand the evidence.
For the person claiming maintenance, the strongest case may not be the one with the largest bank statement.
It may be the case that clearly identifies unexplained transactions and connects them with other evidence of income or financial capacity.
For the person defending the claim, the strongest response may not simply be to deny the transactions.
It may be to explain them with documentary evidence.
That is where proper preparation can make a significant difference.
What Evidence Should Be Collected?
A maintenance dispute involving bank transactions should normally be approached through the complete financial picture.
Bank statements may be important, but they can be read alongside salary slips, income-tax returns, Form 16, business records, GST records where applicable, property documents, investment records, loan documents and other evidence.
The purpose is to understand the actual financial circumstances of the parties.
A single unexplained bank credit may not prove much.
A consistent pattern supported by several independent documents can be far more significant.
The same principle applies to the person defending the claim.
A genuine explanation supported by contemporaneous records is considerably stronger than a bare oral assertion that the money was “not income.”
Can Maintenance Be Modified Later?
Maintenance can, in appropriate circumstances, be modified when there is a material change in circumstances or when the applicable law permits reconsideration on the basis of new evidence.
The Delhi High Court’s September 2026 decision is useful in this regard because the Court did not treat the interim assessment as preventing the parties from pursuing appropriate remedies before the Family Court as the proceedings continued.
This means that matrimonial financial litigation should be viewed as an evolving process.
Income may change.
Employment may change.
Business may expand or decline.
Children’s expenses may increase.
Medical circumstances may change.
New financial evidence may emerge.
Where the law permits modification, these developments can become relevant.
For related guidance, see our article on whether maintenance can be reduced or stopped and the legal remedies available to husbands.
The Real Meaning of the Delhi High Court’s 2026 Decision
The most important lesson from the judgment is simple.
A bank account shows movement of money.
It does not automatically explain the meaning of that movement.
A maintenance court therefore has to look beyond the headline number.
If ₹10 lakh entered an account, the question is not merely whether ₹10 lakh entered.
The question is where it came from, why it was received, whether it was retained, whether it was transferred elsewhere and whether it actually formed part of the person’s financial resources.
That approach protects both spouses.
It prevents genuine business receipts or transfers from being artificially converted into personal income.
At the same time, it prevents a person from hiding genuine earnings behind unexplained financial transactions.
The purpose of maintenance law is to arrive at a fair assessment of financial capacity and reasonable need.
It is not to reward concealment.
It is also not to impose liability on the basis of a misleading mathematical calculation.
What Should a Person Do When Bank Transactions Become an Issue?
The first step should be to understand the transactions rather than immediately arguing about the final maintenance amount.
If you are claiming maintenance and believe that your spouse has not disclosed the full extent of his income, identify the transactions that require explanation and connect them with other evidence.
If you are defending a maintenance claim and the bank statement contains large credits that are not personal income, preserve the documents that establish their actual source and purpose.
In either situation, the financial material should be presented in a way that allows the court to understand the story behind the numbers.
That is ultimately what the Delhi High Court’s ruling brings into focus.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s decision in Annu Garg v. Ashish Garg is an important development in the law relating to bank transactions in maintenance cases.
The judgment does not say that bank statements should be ignored. It also does not say that every unexplained credit should automatically be treated as income.
Instead, the Court has reinforced a practical principle: the nature and source of financial transactions matter.
A bank statement records money entering and leaving an account. The court must still determine what those transactions actually represent before using them to assess disposable income and maintenance.
For a spouse seeking maintenance, this means that bank evidence can be powerful when properly analysed and supported.
For a spouse defending a claim, it means that legitimate transactions should be properly documented and explained.
Ultimately, maintenance should reflect genuine financial capacity and reasonable need.
It should not be calculated merely by adding up every credit appearing in a bank account.
The more important question is always the same:
What did that money actually represent?
Frequently Asked Questions
Can bank transactions be treated as income in maintenance cases?
Bank transactions can be considered while determining maintenance, but every credit cannot automatically be treated as disposable income. The court may examine the nature and source of the transaction before deciding whether it represents actual income.
What did the Delhi High Court say about bank transactions in maintenance cases in 2026?
In Annu Garg v. Ashish Garg, the Delhi High Court held that bank transactions cannot automatically be equated with monthly disposable income without examining their nature and source.
Can a wife rely on her husband’s bank statement to claim higher maintenance?
Yes. Bank statements can be relevant evidence, particularly where they reveal financial activity that appears inconsistent with the income disclosed by the husband. However, the transactions must be properly interpreted.
Does every credit in a husband’s bank account count as income?
No. Credits can represent loans, refunds, business receipts, transfers between accounts, reimbursements or money received for another purpose. The source and nature of the credit are important.
Can business turnover be treated as personal income for maintenance?
Not automatically. Business turnover and personal disposable income are different concepts. The court may examine the business expenses, records and actual financial benefit available to the individual.
Can bank statements prove hidden income?
Bank statements can provide important evidence of unexplained financial activity, but they are normally stronger when supported by other evidence such as tax records, business documents, property records or income affidavits.
Can a husband explain large deposits in his bank account?
Yes. If the deposits are genuine loans, business receipts, transfers or other non-income transactions, the husband can explain their nature and source. Documentary evidence can help establish the explanation.
Is there a fixed percentage for maintenance in India?
There is no universal percentage that automatically applies to every maintenance case. Courts consider the financial circumstances, reasonable needs, income, assets, liabilities and other relevant facts.
Can maintenance be increased after an interim maintenance order?
Depending on the applicable law and facts, modification may be sought where there is a material change in circumstances or relevant additional evidence. The precise remedy depends on the stage and nature of the proceedings.
Does the Delhi High Court judgment mean bank statements are no longer important?
No. Bank statements remain important evidence. The judgment emphasises that they should be interpreted in context rather than automatically treating every credit as personal disposable income.
What happens if money is transferred between a person’s own bank accounts?
A transfer between the person’s own accounts does not necessarily represent new income. The source of the money should be identified before calculating the person’s financial resources.
Can money received from parents be counted as income?
Not automatically. The court may examine whether the amount was a gift, loan, reimbursement, financial assistance or another type of transaction and whether it forms part of the person’s actual financial resources.
Can EMI payments reduce maintenance?
The treatment of loan repayments depends on t
he facts and the nature of the liability. Genuine liabilities may be considered as part of the overall financial assessment, but an EMI does not automatically eliminate the obligation to pay maintenance.
What is the main lesson from the 2026 Delhi High Court ruling?
The main lesson is that money moving through a bank account is not automatically the same as disposable income. Courts must examine the nature and source of the transactions before using them to determine maintenance.
This article is for general legal information only and does not constitute legal advice. The outcome of an individual maintenance case depends upon its facts, evidence, documents and applicable law.