Aaqil Ahmed Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Bilaspur

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Aaqil Ahmed, had not filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer observed that during the demonetization period, Aaqil Ahmed made cash deposits in his bank account aggregating to Rs.12,88,000/-. The Assessing Officer made additions of Rs.6,48,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and Rs.7,76,773/- as income from commission being business income. The assessee appealed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), but the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. The assessee further appealed to the tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution?
• 2. Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Pavan Kranti Nadiminti vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), Visakhapatnam

  Visakhapatnam bench

• Shashikant Yashwant Chaudhari Vs ITO

  Pune bench

• Dipika Singh Vs. ITO, Ward 50(2)

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Kaushal Pravinkumar Shah Vs. ITO

  Ahmedabad bench

• Kambli Prakash Dattu Vs National Faceless e-Asstt. Centre

  Pune bench

• Dilip Kumar Sah Vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhilai

  Raipur bench