Chandrika Marketing Co vs Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The Assessee is a partnership firm that was reassessed for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 based on cash deposits amounting to INR.1,40,08,970/- in the current account of the Assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment by way of an ex-parte order treating the entire cash deposit as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The appeal preferred by the Assessee before the Learned CIT(A)/NFAC got dismissed by way of the impugned order on account of non-prosecution. The Learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition INR.1,40,08,970/- made by the Assessing Officer on merits. The Assessee contended that the cash deposits were in the nature of business receipts arising from purchase and sale of milk. The Assessee also contended that the non-compliance before the authorities below was not deliberate.…

Legal Issues

• 1. On the Facts and Circumstances of the case, The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC, Delhi has dismissed Appeal on Accordingly A.O. has made addition of Rs.1,40,08,970/- on account of unexplained Cash Deposited in Bank Account.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• ITA No.1426/AHD/2026

  Ahmedabad bench

• Shahjad vs ITO

  Delhi 'G' Bench benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• Shri Dharam Singh Vs. The Income tax Officer

  Delhi bench

• M/s. Sanjay Enterprises Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2, Raichur

  ‘B’ Bench : Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• HETAAL JASWANTRAI PAREKH Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

  Mumbai bench

• BHOOP SINGH VS. ITO, WARD-1, VILLAGE PAULI, JULANA, JIND, HARYANA

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed