Dhaval Dinesh Shah vs Income Tax Officer Ward 42(1)(2), Mumbai

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appellant, Dhaval Dinesh Shah, filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 declaring a total income of INR 3,14,760. His case was selected for scrutiny, and he was asked to furnish details of cash deposits made during the demonetization period. The appellant explained that he was acting as a commission agent for Airtel, collecting cash for money transfer and mobile recharge, and that he was permitted to accept Specified Bank Notes (SBN) during the demonetization period as per a notification issued by the Department of Economic Affairs. The Assessing Officer, however, made additions to the appellant's income, which the appellant contested.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Confirmation of addition made by AO treating 50% of the cash deposit as unexplained money.
• 2. Estimation of income at the rate of 25% of commission receipts.
• 3. Levying of interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act.
• 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings under Section 270A and 271AAC of the Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Neelam Dhyani vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-54(1)

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Avijit Roy Vs ITO, Ward-23(3), Hooghly

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Sitaram Pareek vs. ITO, Ward-36(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• SK. Rezzak vs. Income Tax Officer

  SMC Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2017-2018Allowed

• Bhai Bhai Co vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Siliguri

• PR & Co. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Erode