Gora Bai Sahu, Shri Ram Charan Sahu & L/H Late Gora Bai, Sony Vs Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

This case was reopened under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on information regarding the purchase of immovable property worth more than Rs. 30,00,000/-. The legal heir of the assessee filed an income return on 11.11.2019 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,10,500/-. The assessment was completed on 29.11.2019. The assessee claimed income from a stitching job, but the assessment considered it as interest income. The assessee paid Rs. 20,00,000/- for property purchase through a cheque, which was credited to the bank account on 13.02.2012. The source of this payment was claimed to be savings from a stitching job. The Assessing Officer did not examine the source of these payments.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under section 263 of the Income Tax Act is valid.
• 2. Whether the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Gautam Techno Sanitation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-10(1), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Mayura Mohta Vs. DCIT, Circle-29

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Saroj Goenka vs. ITO, Ward-30(1), Kolkata

• Anupma Bidra vs Income Tax Officer, G Budh Nagar

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Lakhubhai Nathubhai Sisodiya vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• Mayank Jain Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Meerut

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed