ITA No 566 of 2024 Gulam Majid

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shri Gulam Majid, did not file his income return for the Assessment Year 2013-14. Based on information from the Department, the appellant deposited Rs.12,50,000/- in his savings bank account. The assessment was reopened under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, and a notice under section 148 was issued on 30.03.2021. The assessee did not respond to the notice or subsequent notices under section 142(1). The Assessing Officer passed a best judgment assessment order under section 147 read with section 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961, adding Rs.26,25,000/- towards cash deposits and other credits in the bank account. The assessee appealed to the CIT (A), who allowed partial relief for two credits and rejected the explanation for the remaining amount. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the appellant could substantiate the claim of amount received towards the sale of old gold ornaments?
• 2. Whether the appellant could explain the source of Rs.6,80,000/- transferred from a cash credit account to his savings bank account?
• 3. Whether the appellant could explain the source of Rs.2,63,000/- received from his wife?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• ITA No 523 of 2024 Madhavapeddy Sudhakar

  Hyderabad bench

• Mr. Nivrutti Pandurang Bhor Vs. Income Tax Officer

• AZAD SINGH VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(1), SAHARANPUR UP

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Dhananjoy Das Adhikari Vs ITO Ward-27(2), Haldia

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-2018Allowed

• Dipak Agarwalla HUF vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2019-2020Allowed

• Rahul Nandkumar Shelar vs. ITO

  Pune bench