Anuradha Reddy vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gudivada

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Anuradha Reddy, made cash deposits in her Karur Vysya Bank account during the demonetization period amounting to Rs. 34 lakhs. The Assessing Officer issued notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, asking for the return of income and the source of the cash deposits. The assessee did not respond to the notices, leading to the issuance of a show cause notice under section 142(1) and obtaining information from the bank authorities under section 133(6) of the Act. The assessee filed a letter with the return of income for the assessment year 2017-18, admitting business income of Rs. 5,50,000/- and income from other sources at Rs. 36,297/-. However, the Assessing Officer found the explanation unsatisfactory and treated the entire deposit as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act, leading to an addition of Rs. 34,00,000/- and penalty proceedings under sections 271F and 271AAC of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, which the assessee appealed to the Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte.
• 2. Whether the Tribunal should remit the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to provide an opportunity to the assessee to be heard.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Balan Logeswaran Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tiruchengode

• M/s. Karur Vysya Bank v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Chennai bench

• Bisauha Ram Verma Vs ITO-1(2), Raipur

  Raipur bench

• Tamraparani Enterprises and Realty Pvt Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 3(1), Chennai

  Chennai bench

• Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Vs. ITO Ward 28(2)(1)

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel Vs. ITO

  Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Allowed