Bharati Vilas Malusare vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Bharati Vilas Malusare, did not file her return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Statutory notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were issued, which were duly served upon the assessee. A show cause notice was issued on 06.12.2019, granting her the final opportunity to represent her case. The assessee failed to respond, leading to the issuance of a best judgment assessment order under section 144 of the Act on 11.12.2019. The Assessing Officer added cash deposits of Rs.11,15,000/- made during the demonetization period to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer, dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non-compliance. The assessee appealed against this order, claiming that the Assessing Officer did not consider cash withdrawals made before the demonetization period and that the net profits of the business were deemed at 10% of the total cash deposits, which was not true and fair.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Assessing Officer rightly added the cash deposits made during the demonetization period to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Saifa Molla Vs. ITO, Ward-26(3), Kolkata

  Kolkata 'SMC' Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Mosarrat Perween vs ITO, Ward-61(4), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Smt. Murugarathinasamy Sangeetha v. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Erode

  Chennai bench

• MANISHA AGGARWAL VS. ITO, WARD 70(3), NEW DELHI

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Pradipkumar Arvindbhai Kothari vs. ITO

  Ahmedabad bench

• Usha Patodia Vs. ITO, Ward 30(1)

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed