Amit Yadav Vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Amit Yadav, is a salaried employee who jointly purchased a residential unit with his mother, Smt. Vidhya Wati Yadav, from M/s. Bhutani Infra Group & Associates. The payment for the unit was made by account payee cheque. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) alleged that the assessee made an unaccounted cash payment of Rs.14,35,250/- during the financial year 2019-20. The assessment was reopened based on a search action at the premises of M/s. Bhutani Infra Group & Associates, where unaccounted cash receipts were admitted by the company’s officials.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Validity of reopening of assessment without issuing notice u/s.148A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
• 2. Merits of the addition concerning the joint purchase of property.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Vishal Bhutani v. ACIT, Central Circle-3 & ITO, Ward-1

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2019-20Partly Allowed

• Sh. Karan Oberoi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Faridabad

• Shah Petroleum Products Vs. ACIT, Circle 27(3)

  Mumbai Bench 'F' benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• DCIT vs. Goyal and Co. (Const.) Pvt. Ltd.

  Ahmedabad bench

• ITA 2223/HYD/2025

  Hyderabad bench

• Divya Panwar vs DCIT

  Delhi "B" Bench: New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed